Madras High Court
The Government Of India vs R.Ravi Kumar on 10 February, 2021
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 10.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
and
C.M.P.(MD)Nos.6212, 6213, 6214, 6215, 6217, 6219 of 2020
W.A.(MD)No.1129 of 2020:
The Government of India,
Ministry of Law and Justice,
Department of Legal Affairs (Notary Cell),
Shastri Bhavan,
New Delhi – 110 001.
Rep. by
The Joint Secretary and Legal Advisor : Appellant
Vs.
R.Ravi Kumar : Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent as against the
order dated 15.11.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.4692 of 2019.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Sankaranarayanan,
Assistant Solicitor General of India
for Mr.P.Subbiah
Central Government Senior Panel Counsel
In all appeals
1/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
For Respondent : Mr.N.Tamilmani
in W.A.(MD).1129, 1132 to 1134/2020
Mr.S.Vijayakumar
in W.A.(MD).1130/2020
Mr.I.Pinaygash
in W.A.(MD).1131/2020
*****
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
The appellant has raised a legal issue before us, namely, the application of
Section 34 of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act to a decision, making a
Lawyer as a Notary.
2. The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the
appellant submitted that it is a privilege that is being conferred on a Lawyer and
therefore, the provision, which is otherwise applicable to a public servant, cannot
be extended.
3. The respective learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners
submitted that factually there is no dispute with respect to the disability suffered
2/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
by the writ petitioners and therefore, to this extent, this Court will have to consider
that appointing them as Notaries would help to sustain and improve their career.
4. Though, prima facie, we concur with the submission made by the learned
Assistant Solicitor General of India, considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, especially the fact that the writ petitioners are suffering from disabilities, we
do not wish to interfere with the ultimate finding, while setting aside the reasoning
of the learned Single Judge with respect to the scope and applicability of the
provisions of the Act to the case of appointment of Notaries.
5. In such view of the matter, the appeals stand allowed in part, with respect
to the findings rendered by the learned Single Judge on the scope and applicability
of Section 34 of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act to the case on hand.
Resultantly, the relief granted to the writ petitioners stand confirmed. The
appellant is directed to give effect to the order of the learned Single Judge within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
6. The question of law as to the applicability of the Act will be considered at
the appropriate time, as we have recorded only our prima facie view. We further
3/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
make it clear that this is a one time measurement only and therefore, this order
cannot be quoted as a precedent. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,
all the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Index : Yes / No [M.M.S.,J.] [S.A.I.,J.]
Internet : Yes 10.02.2021
gk
Note:
Issue order copy by 11.02.2021.
4/5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
gk
W.A.(MD)Nos.1129 to 1134 of 2020
10.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
