Purushottam Nana Porkute vs Union Of India
2017 Latest Caselaw 1817 Del

$~30
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                  Judgment delivered on: 12.04.2017

+        W.P.(C) 2938/2017
PURUSHOTTAM NANA PORKUTE                                        ..... Petitioner
                             versus

UNION OF INDIA                                                  .... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner       :   Mr. Saurabh Bhargavan, Advocate.

For the Respondent   :       Mr. Jasmeet Singh, CGSC with
                             Mr.Srivats Kaushal, Advocate for UOI.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

12.04.2017 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent-UOI to consider and decide the application for renewal of certificate of Notary filed by the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 11th September, 2015 in W.P. (C) No.8503/2015 titled Neelam Sharma Versus Union of India.

3. This Court is of the opinion that as the representation/renewal

application; filed by the petitioner is still pending, the respondent must dispose of the same by way of a speaking order.

4. Consequently, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) The petitioner, if he so desires, may, within 10 days hereof, file more particulars/documents in support of his explanation for the delay in applying for renewal, if any.

(ii) The respondent shall thereafter, within six weeks of the receipt of such further documents from the petitioner, consider the grounds given by the petitioner for condonation of delay in applying for renewal and shall take a reasoned decision thereon.

(iii) The respondent, if of the opinion that the petitioner is to be denied the renewal for any other reason, would, after notifying the petitioner of the said reason and after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard thereon within the subject period of six weeks, shall pass reasoned order within a period of three months from today.

(iv) Needless to state that if the petitioners remains aggrieved, he shall have his remedies.

5. Copy of order be given dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J APRIL 12, 2017 st