Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8880 (UTT)

AQUIL AHMAD v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/2062/2025 · 2025-07-11

Ravindra Maithani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D1- 18 WPMS No.2062 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Pradeep Chamyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. Heard. The petitioner was appointed as a Notary Advocate, under the Notaries Act, 1952, in Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, but despite his application having been filed for renewal, it has yet not been renewed. The application for renewal had already been filed by the petitioner on 14.11.2024, which is Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. Hence the petitioner seeks directions that the respondents may be directed to renew the notary certificate of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already filed an application on 14.11.2024, Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, for renewal of the Notary certificate, but it has yet not been renewed. Therefore, now the petitioner may be given liberty to file a fresh application within a week with further directions to the respondents authority to decide the application within a stipulated time. Learned State Counsel submits that in case the petitioner gives a fresh application, it shall be decided within a period of four weeks. The Court takes on record the statement given by learned State Counsel. The writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application to the respondents authorities within a week. The respondent authorities are further directed to take a decision on such application within a period of four weeks, thereafter, in accordance with law. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 11.07.2025 RV