OM PRAKASH CHATURVEDI versus PRINCIPAL SECY. NYAYA & LEGAL REMEMBRANCER U.P. & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Om Prakash Chaturvedi v. Principal Secy. Nyaya & Legal Remembrancer U.P. & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 49685 of 2002 [2006] RD-AH 20574 (5 December 2006)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

WP No. 49685 of 2002

Hon'ble Yatindra Singh, J

Hon'ble Ran Vijai Singh, J

1. The petitioner was appointed as Notary Advocate on 18.3.1999. He applied for renewal of the same on 15.3.2002  along with stamp duty of Rs. 500/-. Subsequently by the order dated 3.9.2002  and 25.9.2002 his name was removed as a Notary Advocate and his application for renewal was rejected on the ground that he has filed renewal application with deficient stamp duty, hence the present writ petition.

2. We have heard counsel for the petitioners and the standing counsel for the respondents.  

3. The petitioner had applied for renewal alongwith stamp fee of Rs. 500/- on the ground that this was notified stamp duty. When he came to know about the enhanced stamp duty he sent the same on 31.8.2002.  This fact is not denied. In view of this, the renewal application could not be rejected on the ground that the stamp duty was insufficient.

4. In view of this, the order dated 3.9.2002 and 25.9.2002 are quashed. Respondent no. 1 may decide the application of renewal dated 15.3.2002 of the petitioner in accordance with law at an early date, if possible, within three months from the date of from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.  The petitioner alongwith certified copy of this order will also file a copy of his aforesaid renewal application, other necessary documents and a duly stamped self-addressed envelope. The concerned respondent after taking decision will communicate the same to the petitioner.

5. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

Date: 5.12.2006

BBL

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.