-1- 2025:CGHC:5553 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1093 of 2019 1 - Ashish Shukla S/o Late R. K. Shukla Aged About 49 Years R/o Subhash Nagar, Durg, Tahsil And District - Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhagan Lal Sahu S/o Vijay Kumar Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Ward No. 53, Kotiyakala Durg, Tahsil And District - Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Department Of Legal Affairs, Ministry Of Law And Justice, New Delhi - 11011, District : New Delhi, Delhi. 2 - Competent Authority (Notary Cell) Department Of Legal Affairs, Ministry Of Law And Justice 4th Floor, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi - 11011, District : New Delhi, Delhi. 3 - Competent Authority District And Sessions Judge Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. R. K. Gomasta, Advocate For Union of India : Ms. Anmol Sharma, Central Government Counsel For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Samrat Singh Marhas, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 30.01.2025 1) The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- “10(i) that,this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to consider the application of the petitioners and call for fresh interview for the post of notary, in the interest of justice. (ii) that, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any other writ or writs/order or orders/direction or directions which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the application for appointment of Notaries was invited vide advertisement dated 16.08.2018 by respondent No.2. He would further submit that the last date for submission of application form was 31.08.2018 and the petitioners submitted their application forms before the concerned District Judge on 29.08.2018 prior to cut off date i.e. 31.08.2018. It is argued by Mr. Gomasta that application submitted by the petitioners were not considered for appointment of Notaries by the respondent No.2. He would also contend that a direction may be issued to the respondent No.2 to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners strictly in accordance with law. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose the submission made by Mr. Gomasta and submit that the petitioners submitted their application forms before the concerned District Judge on 29.08.2018, whereas the cut off date was 31.08.2018, and applications were not received by office of respondent No.2 prior to cut off date, therefore, the applications of the petitioners were not considered; thus, the instant petition -3- deserves to be dismissed. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on file. 5) Admittedly, the petitioners submitted their application forms on 29.08.2018 before the concerned District Judge, and the last date for submission of application form was 31.08.2018; the application forms should have reached in the office of respondent No.2 prior to cut off date, but in case of the petitioners, applications were not received at the office of respondent No.2 prior to cut off date, therefore, the application forms submitted by the petitioners were not considered; thus, I do not find any error on the part of respondent No.2 for not calling the petitioners for interviews for Notaries; further, the selected/appointed Noteries pursuant to advertisement dated 16.08.2018, have not been arrayed as respondents, therefore also, this petition is not maintainable. 6) Taking into consideration the above stated facts, this petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to participate in advertisement if issued by the respondent(s) for appointment of notary in future. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim