915-WP-11820-2025 (C).doc Mayur IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11820 OF 2025 Suchita Ramesh Kotkar Alias Suchita Bhushan Bahalkar ...Petitioner Versus Union Of India (through Its Secretary) And Ors ...Respondents ... Adv. Rohan Sonawane, a/w Adv. Krutik Veera, for the Petitioner. Adv. Akanksha Mishra, a/w Adv. Rahul Tiwari, for the Respondent- UOI. ... CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. DATE : 9th OCTOBER, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Rohan Sonawane, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, and Ms. Akanksha Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The instant Writ Petition has been preferred, inter alia, for the following substantive relief: “That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or such other writ thereby directing the Respondent No.2 and 3 to issue Certificate of Practice as a Notary in District Nashik to the 1/3 MAYUR KONDIRAM ADANE Digitally signed by MAYUR KONDIRAM ADANE Date: 2026.10.12 13:32:40 +0530 915-WP-11820-2025 (C).doc Petitioner;” 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is enrolled as an Advocate with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (bearing Enrollment No. MAH/4052/2010 dated 19th July 2010). Subsequently, the Petitioner submitted an application for appointment/authorization to practice as a Notary under the Notaries Act, 1952. 4. It is submitted that a Certificate of Practice was issued by the Deputy Legal Adviser, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi, authorizing her to practice as a Notary in and throughout “Khanapur” for a period of five years with effect from 19th March 2025. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner highlights that a discrepancy crept into the said Certificate, as the area of practice ought to have been specified as "District Nashik / throughout Maharashtra" instead of "Khanapur". The said error was duly brought to the notice of the concerned Authority vide an email dated 3rd May 2025. However, despite running from pillar to post, the grievance of the Petitioner has remained unredressed under the Notaries Act, 1952, constraining the Petitioner to approach this Court seeking such relief. 6. Per contra, Ms. Akanksha Mishra, learned counsel for the 2/3 915-WP-11820-2025 (C).doc Respondents – Union of India, submits that since applications were invited online through an automated portal which lacked a feature/provision for online rectification of such errors, efforts are currently underway to rectify such discrepancies and address the relief sought. She prays that reasonable breathing time be accorded to the Respondents to examine and rectify the error in accordance with law. 7. Having regard to the factual situation that emerges and in view of the fair statement made by learned counsel for the Respondent – Union of India, we find that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping this Writ Petition pending. 8. In the light of the communication dated 3rd May 2025 issued via email, we expect and direct that all necessary remedial steps to rectify the Petitioner’s Certificate of Practice shall be taken by the Respondents and a corrected Certificate of Practice shall be issued to the Petitioner in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of uploading of this order. 9. Accordingly, with the above observation/direction, the Writ Petition stands Disposed Of. [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE] 3/3