← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/2835/2018

Devmurari Pravinchandra Premdasbhai v. Union Of India

2018-03-23Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Shakdher2 pages

$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2835/2018 DEVMURARI PRAVINCHANDRA PREMDASBHAI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Saurabh Bhargavan, Adv.

versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Mr. Jasmeet Singh, CGSC with Ms.

Astha Sharma and Mr. Srivats Kaushal, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

O R D E R

% 23.03.2018 1.

Issue notice. Mr. Jasmeet Singh accepts notice. Learned counsel says that he does not wish to file a counter affidavit as the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by a judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court dated 11.9.2015, passed in W.P.(C) 8503/2015, titled: Neelam Sharma v. UOI. It appears that this judgment has been followed by another Judge of this Court. The said judgment is dated 5.2.2018 and is passed in W.P.(C) No.1022/2018, titled: Latika Mohan Kulkarni v. UOI.

2.

The substantive prayers made in this petition are as follows: "(A) Direct the respondent to consider and decide the petitioner's renewal application dated 17-04-2017 (Annexure P-2) submitted with respondent for the renewal of his Certificate of Practice as Notary within such period as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and Proper.

(B) condone the delay of around 5 months in filing the application dated 17-04-2017 for renewal of certificate of

practice as Notary Public."

3.

It would be evident upon perusal of the prayer extracted above that the petitioner seeks renewal of his certificate of practice as a Notary. The petitioner filed his renewal application, which is, dated 17.4.2017, concededly, after a delay of five months. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the application dated 17.4.2017 for renewal has not been actioned. 5.

In these circumstances, as has been suggested by Mr. Jasmeet Singh, counsel for the respondent, the application for renewal of the petitioner will be processed in line with the directions issued by the Court in the aforementioned judgments.

6.

The writ petition is disposed of in the aforementioned terms. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J MARCH 23, 2018 rb