D. P. WADHWA ( 1 ) THE petitioner, a candidate for appointment as notary, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the notification No. F. 17/5/91-Judl. , dated 30 April 1992, whereby 32advocates were appointed as Notaries under the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952. These advocates are respondents 4 to 35. Respondents 1,2 and 3 are respectively the Lt. Governor of Delhi, the Delhi Administration through the Secretary (Law and Judicial), and again the Administrator of Union Territory of Delhi through its Chief Secretary. The petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus directing respondents I, 2 and 3 to appoint her as a Notary as it is stated that there are still eight vacancies existing as she says she fulfills all the qualifications for appointment as a Notary. Further direction is sought that appointment of Notaries be made following the procedure prescribed under the Notaries Act, 1952. and the Notaries Rules, 1956 (for short "the Act" and "the Rules" respectively ). ( 2 ) BEFORE we examine the rival contentions it will be appropriate to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules. Under section 3, the Central Government for the whole or any part of India, and any State Government for the whole or any part of the State, may appoint as notaries any legal practitioners or other persons who possess such qualifications as may be prescribed. "legal practitioner" has been defined in clause (c) of section 2 of tlie Act and there is no controversy that the petitioner as well as respondents 4 to 35 are legal practitioners within the meaning of this clause. Section 4 deals with maintaining of registers of notaries so appointed and the particulars which are to becontained in the registers. Section 5 deals with entry of names in the register and issue or renewal of certificates of practice, and it is as under :- " (1) Every notary who intends to practise as such shall on payment to the Government appointing him of the prescribed fee, if any, be entitled - (a) to have his name entered in the Register maintained by that Government under Section 4, and (b) to a certificate authorising him to practise for a period of three years from the date on which the certificate is issued to him. (2) Every such notary who wishes to continue to practise after the expiry of the period for which his certificate of practise has been issued under this section shall, on application made to the Government appointing him and payment of the prescribed fee, if any,be entitled to have his certificate of practice renewed for three years at a time. "section 6 deals with publication of lists of notaries, and section 7 prescribes the seal of notaries. Then section 8 describes the functions of notaries which are as under :- " (1) A notary may do all or any of the following acts by virtue of his office, namely :- (a) verify, authenticate, certify or attest the execution of any instrument; (b) present any promissory note, hundi or bill of exchange for acceptance or payment or demand better security; (c) note or protest the dishonour by non-acceptance or non-payment of. any promissory note, hundi or bill of exchange" or protest for better security or prepare acts of honour under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (XXVI of 1881), or serve notice of such note or protest; (d) note and draw up ship s protest, boat s protest or protest relating to demurrage and other commercial matters; (e) administer oath to, or take affidavit from, any person; (f) prepare bottomry and respondentia bonds, charter parties and other mercantile documents; (g) prepare, attest or authenticate any instrument intended to take effect in any country or place outside India in such form and language as may conform to the law of the place where such deed is intended to operate; (h) translate, and verify the translation of, any documents from one langauge into another; (i) any other act which may be prescribed. (2) No act specified in sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a notarial act except when it is done by a notary under his signature and official seal. "section 9 puts a bar on practice without certificates issued under section 5. Section 10 deals with removal of names from register. The name of the notary if he is found, upon inquiry in the prescribed manner, to be guilty of such professional or other misconduct as, in the opinion of the Government, renders him unfit to practise as a notary. Section 10 deals with removal of names from register. The name of the notary if he is found, upon inquiry in the prescribed manner, to be guilty of such professional or other misconduct as, in the opinion of the Government, renders him unfit to practise as a notary. Under section 11, any reference to a notary public in any other law shall be construed as a reference to a notary entitled to practise under this Act. Section 12 prescribes penalty for falsely representing to be a notary, etc. , and under section 13 no court shall take cognizance of any offence committed by a notary in the exercise of purported exercise of his functions under this Act except on a complaint in writing made by an officer authorised by the Central Government or a State Government by general or special order in this behalf, and no magistrate other than a presidency magistrate or a magistrate of the first class shall try an offence punishable under this Act. Section 14 empowers the Central Government to have reciprocal arrangements for recognition of notarial acts done by foreign notaries. Then under section 15, the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the purposes of this Act. The rules which are relevant for our purposes may be set out as under :- RULE 3. Qualifications for appointment as a notary.- No person shall be eligible for appointment as a notary unless on the date of the application for such appointment - (a) he is notary public appointed by the Master of Faculties in England; or (b) he has been practising a legal practitioner for at least ten years. Rule 4. Application for appointment as anotary.- (1) Aperson may make an application for appointment as a notary (hereinafter called the applicant s) in the form of a memorial address to such officer or authority (hereinafter referred to as the competent authority) of the appropriate Government as that Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, designate in this behalf. (2) The memorial shall be drawn as nearly as may be in accordance with Form 1. (2) The memorial shall be drawn as nearly as may be in accordance with Form 1. (3) The memorial shall be signed by the applicant and in the case of an applicant other than a practising notary public appointed by the Master of Faculties in England, shall also becountersigned by at least ten persons representative of the magistrates, bankers, merchants and principal inhabitants of the local area in which the applicant desires to practise as a notary. Rule 6. Preliminary action on application.- (1) The competent authority shall examine every applicant received by him and if he is satisfied that the applicant does not possess the qualifications specified in Rule 3, or that any previous application of the applicant for appointment as a notary was rejected within six p73 months before the date of application shall reject it and inform the applicant accordingly. (2) If the competent authority does not reject the applicationunder subrule (1),- (a) he shall publish in the Official Gazette a notice of the application inviting objections, if any, to the appointment of the applicant as a notary, to be submitted within fourteen days of such publication; and (b) he may, if he thinks fit, ascertain from any Bar Council, Bar Association, Incorporated Law Society or other authority in the area where the applicant proposed to practise, the objections, if any, to the appointment of the applicant as a notary, to be submitted within the time fixed for the purpose. Rule 7. Recommendations of the competent authority.- ( 1)P The competent authority shall, after holding such inquiry as he thinks fit and after giving the applicant an opportunity of making his representations against the objections, if any, received within the time fixed under subrule (2) of Rule 6, make a report to the appropriate Government recommending either that the application may be allowed for the whole or any part of the area to which the application relates or that it may be rejected. (2) The competent authority shall also make his recommendation in the report under sub-rule (1) regarding the persons by whom the whole or any part of the costs of the application including cost of hearing, if any, shall be borne. (2) The competent authority shall also make his recommendation in the report under sub-rule (1) regarding the persons by whom the whole or any part of the costs of the application including cost of hearing, if any, shall be borne. (3) In making his recommendation under sub-rule (1), the competent authority shall have due regard to the following matters, namely :- (a) whether the applicant ordinarily resides in the area in which he proposes to practise as a notary; (b) whether, having regard to the commercial importance of the area in which the applicant proposes to practise and the number of existing notaries practising in the area it is necessary to appoint any additional notaries for the area; (c) whether, having regard to his knowledge and experience of commercial law and the nature of the objections, if any, raised in respect of his appointment as a notary and in case of a legal practitioner also to the extent of his practice, the applicant is fit to be appointed as a notary; (d) whether the applicant belongs to a firm of legal practitioners, whether having regard to the number of existing notaries in that firm, it is proper and necessary to appoint any additional P53 notary from that firm, and (e) where applications from other applicants in respect of the area are pending, whether the applicant is more suitable than such other applicants. Rule 8. Appointment of a notary.- (1) On receipt of the report of the competent authority the appropriate Government shall consider the report and shall- (a) allow the application in respect of the whole of the area to which it relates, or (b) allow the application in respect of any part of the area to which it relates; or (c) reject the application; and shall also make such orders as that Government thinks fit regarding the persons by whom the whole or any part of the cost of the application including the cost of hearing, if any, shall be borne. (2) An applicant shall be informed of every order passed by the appropriate Government under sub-rule (1 ). (2) An applicant shall be informed of every order passed by the appropriate Government under sub-rule (1 ). (3) Any applicant whose application has been rejected or allowed in respect of only a part of the area to which it relates or against whom an order as to cost has been made under sub-rule (1) may, within sixty days of the date of the order apply to the appropriate Government for reviewing the order and that Government may, after making such further inquiry as it thinks fit, pass such order as it considers necessary. (4) Where the application is allowed, the appropriate Government shall appoint the applicant as a notary and direct his name to be entitled in the Register of Notaries maintained by that Government under Section 4 of the Act and issue to him a certificate on payment of prescribed fees authorising him to practise in the area to which the application relates or in such part thereof as the appropriate Government may specify in the certificate, as anotary for a period of three years from the date on which the certificate is issued to him. (5) The Register of Notaries shall be in Form II-A and the certificate of practice shall be in Form II-B. Rule II prescribes as to how the transaction of business is to be done by a notary and this may also be reproduced as under :- 11. Transaction of business by a notary- (1) A notary in transacting the business under the Act shall use the forms set forth in the appendix to these Rules. (2) Besides recording declaration of payment for honour a notary shall also rgister notings and protests made. Every notary shall maintain a Notarial Register in the prescribed Form XV. (3) Where any demand of acceptance or payment or better security has been made by a clerk, a notary shall, after examination of the entry in the Register relating to such demand, affix his signature thereto, and cause the clerk to affix his signature also to the entry. (4) Each Notary shall, before bringing the Notarial Register into use add a certificate on the title page specifying the number of pages it contains. Such certificate shall be signed and dated by the notary. (4) Each Notary shall, before bringing the Notarial Register into use add a certificate on the title page specifying the number of pages it contains. Such certificate shall be signed and dated by the notary. (5) Every notary shall permit the District Judge or such officers as the appropriate Government from time to time appoints in this behalf to inspect his register at such times,not often than twice a year, as the District Judge or officer may fix. District Judges or Officers appointed by the State Government will have power to lodge a report to the appropriate Government for taking action against a notary. (6) When the original instrument is in a language other than English any noting or protest or entry in his register which has to be made in respect of the instrument by a notary may be made either in that language or in English. (7) In making presentment of bills or notes a notary shall observe the provisions of Chapter V of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26of 1881 ). (8) The notary may :- (1) draw, attest or certify documents under his official seal including conveyance of properties; (2) note and certify the general transactions relating to negotiable instruments; (3) prepare a will or other testamentary documents; and (4) prepare and take affidavits for various prupsoes for his notarial acts. (9) Every notary shall grant a receipt for the fees and charges ralised by him and maintain a register showing all the fees and charges realised. Under Rule 14, every notary shall, in the first week of January every year, submit to the appropriate Government, an annual return in Form XIV of the notarial acts done by him during the preceding year. We may also reproduce here as well Form I, the Memorial, as prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 :- "form I Memorial The Memorial of (name of the applicant sheweth: 1. That the memorialist is a person eligible for appointment as a notary under the Notaries Act, 1952, and the Notaries Rules, 1956. (Here state how the memorialist is qualified for appointment as a notary ). 2. That the memorialist has resided in. . . . . (here state the name of the local area where he intends to practice) for upwards of. . . . . . (state how long ). 3. That the number of notaries practising at. . . (Here state how the memorialist is qualified for appointment as a notary ). 2. That the memorialist has resided in. . . . . (here state the name of the local area where he intends to practice) for upwards of. . . . . . (state how long ). 3. That the number of notaries practising at. . . . . (here statethe name of the area where he intends to practise), is as follows:- Notaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (here state number) 3-A. That theaverage annual income of the memorialist during the preceding three years is. . . . . . (here state the figure ). 4. That the above number of notaries practising in the local area is insufficient for the requirements thereof. (The grounds of the statement should be added ). 4-A. That no previous application of the memorialist has been rejected or withdrawn by him, within the preceding six months. 5. (Give any further particulars in support of the application ). The memorialist, therefore, prays that the Government be pleased to appoint and admit him a notary under and by virtue of the Notaries Act, 1952 (53) of 1952) and the Notaries Rule, 1956 to practise in. . . . . . . . . (here state the name of the local area ). Date. . . . . . day of. . . . . . . 19. Signature of memorialist. We the undersigned magistrates, bankers, merchants and others residing in and above. . . . . . (here state the name of the local area), have read the foregoing memorial of. . . . . . (here state the name of the applicants) and are satisfied that the statements contained therein are true and that he is a fit and proper person to be appointed a notary and we join in the prayer thereof. 383. htm ( 3 ) WE have set out the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules to show the importance offunctions of a notary and the process which the law requires has to be gone into before any appointment to the post of notary could be made. Petitioner has contended that the appointment of respondents 4 to 35 had been made inbreach of the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The respondents have denied this. Petitioner has contended that the appointment of respondents 4 to 35 had been made inbreach of the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The respondents have denied this. To decide the rival contentions between the parties we thought it was more appropriate to examine the record of respondents 1,2 and 3 pertaining to the appointment of respondents 4 to 35. However, it is not necessary for us to detail as to how the file moved from the office of the Deputy Commissioner to the Delhi Administration and back and forth and ultimately culminating in the appointment of respondents 4 to 35. ( 4 ) THE Deputy Commissioner, the competent authority as notified under the Act, invited applications for appointment as Notaries for filling up 40 vacancies of Notaries in Delhi to be filled in by the Delhi Administration (Rule 4 ). Quota for notaries for Union Territory of Delhi was increased from 90 to 150 out of which 100 could be appointed by the Delhi Administration and 50 by the Central Government. At the relevant time 40 vacancies existed in the quota of the Delhi Administralion. 136 applications were received in the form prescribed within the period stipulated, and4 applications were received late. On examination (Rules 3 and 6) it was found that III applications were complete in all respect which were to be considered. Thereafter, Gazette Notification was issued giving the names of the candidates found qualified for appointment as Notary and objections invited. Communications were also addressed to the Bar Council of Delhi and other local Bar associations. The competent authority did not receive any objections to the appointment of any person as Notary. The competent authority appointed a committee consisting of thea. D. M. (Hq), SDM (PB)/oic (J ). and S. D. M. (KW Camp) to assist him to go into the entire process of scrutinising the applications. Of course, this committee never appears to have met. Before the Gazette Notification was issued, 14 more applications for appointment as notaries were received by the competent authority from the Delhi Administration. A revised list of 136 candidates was drawn up who were found to be qualified to be appointed as Notaries. Then discussions took place for devising a scheme for appointment of 40 notaries out of 136 persons, all of them were legal practitioners. These 136 applications were divided area-wise into. A revised list of 136 candidates was drawn up who were found to be qualified to be appointed as Notaries. Then discussions took place for devising a scheme for appointment of 40 notaries out of 136 persons, all of them were legal practitioners. These 136 applications were divided area-wise into. five police districts as per the residential ad- dresses given by the candidates on their applications. A suggestion was mooted that against the total population of one crore for Delhi a notary be appointed for every 2. 5 lakh of population. A chart was, thus, prepared which is as under :-The following criteria was then adopted for the purpose of selection :- "i) Application should be in the form of memorial as per rule 4 (1), ii) Memorial should be countersigned by at least 10 persons of the area as per rule 4 (3), iii) Period of stay of the applicant in his area would be taken into consideration. This was to be mentioned by every applicant in point 2 of the memorial drawn in accordance with Form-1. "after this criteria was laid down, then chart regarding each police district was prepared with the particulars as under:-After the particulars of each candidate were set out as per this chart district-wise, comments were recorded, and these were to the effect that candidates at serial Nos. . . . . . . may be considered for appointment, and that candidates at serial Nos. . . . . . . . may be rejected on merits. As to how the candidates were rejected on merit, nothing was indicated, and the consideration for appointment was only the period of stay in the district. No other consideration appears to have been gone into in recommending the appointment to the Delhi Administration. In working out the vacancies for North District where the appointments were to be made of five notaries, recommendations were made of candidates at serial No. 2,3,5,6 and 11 on the basis of period of their stay as were mentioned. Then candidate at serial No. 8 was added to be considered for appointment and it was mentioned that this was against one vacancy not filled in in the North-West District. The Officer-in- Charge (Judi) then records a note on 13 March 1992 suggesting the names of 39 candidates recommending for appointment as Notaries distict-wise. Then candidate at serial No. 8 was added to be considered for appointment and it was mentioned that this was against one vacancy not filled in in the North-West District. The Officer-in- Charge (Judi) then records a note on 13 March 1992 suggesting the names of 39 candidates recommending for appointment as Notaries distict-wise. This note of the Officer-in-Charge records that after scrutiny of all 136 applicants, 38 applicants had been found more suitable than others as per criteria laid, and then finally records as under:- "against the 6 vacancies allocated to North-West District only 5 applicants have been recommended for appointment as there is no other applicant who fulfils the reqired criteria. It is, therefore, requested that I appointment may be recommended from any other District. (This has been since added to vacancy in North Distt ). "the abovesaid note originating from the Officer-in-Charge (Judl) and forwarded by A. D. M. (Judi) ultimately finds approval of the Deputy Commissioner who forwarded the same to the Secretary, Delhi Administration, for consideration after recording his consideration as follows :- "as Secretary is aware, 136 applications were examined by us for consideration of 40 posts of Notary Public. In accordance with the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952 read with the Notaries Rules, 1956, the applications have been processed, the details of which may be seen from pages 27 to 37/n. OIC (Judl) has done a pains-taking exercise in processing the various applications and on the basis of her scrutiny 39 applications found more suitable than the others have been recommended at 35-36/n. 2. For recommending suitable candidates we divided the applications received areawise into 9 Police Districts. Thereafter, on the basis of population of each district, the quota of 40 was divided into each of the districts. By and large the number of applications received were more than the number of appointments which can be made in any district. For the purpose of scrutiny, we went strictly by the requirements laid down under Rule 4 (1), and the Memorial, and have also taken into account the period of stay of the applicant in his area. 3. One case has been recommended separately as a special case since the applicant was a Jandk migrant. sd/- (Arun Mathur) Deputy Commissioner, Delhi. 16. 3. 3. One case has been recommended separately as a special case since the applicant was a Jandk migrant. sd/- (Arun Mathur) Deputy Commissioner, Delhi. 16. 3. 92 " ( 5 ) THE matter is again sent back to the competent authority, the Deputy Commissioner, as it was pointed out that while processing the matter and working out the number of Notaries to be appointed in each of the 9 police districts on the basis of population, only 40 new vacancies had been taken into account and the factum of 60 existing Notaries already appointed by Delhi Administration and residing in the areas of different police districts had not been taken into account. The competent authority was requested to consider this aspect and then to work out the number of additional notaries required in each police district having regard to the commercial importance of the area in which the applicant proposed to practice and the number ofexisting Notaries practising in the area as required by Rule 7 (3) of the Rules. The matter was then reconsidered in the office of the Deputy Commissioner. It was pointed out (1) with reference to the criterion of commercial importance it was extremely difficult to devise foolproof norms to evaluate the comparative importance of each police sub-division commercially and also the ratio on which the vacancies were to be devided between the sub-divisions inter se, and (2) keeping in view the number of notaries earlier appointed in Delhi the notary-population ratio stood revised by 1:1 lakh population. It was mentioned that the criteria on which the earlier 60 notaries were appointed were not known as the appointments had not been made by the Deputy Commissioner. It was then mentioned that, however, on the basis of their given addresses, the earlier appointees had been categorised into police sub-divisions and existing vacancies per police sub-division had been worked out afresh. Now the detailed proposal for appointment in various police districts was as under :- "1. New Delhi District:- 1. Sh. Shailender Billore. 2. South Delhi District:- 1. Sh. V. P. Bhardwaj. 2. Sh. Surinder Singh Sethi. 3. Sh. Karan Singh. 4. Sh. Lekh Ram. 3. South West Delhi District: 1. Sh. R. K. Dhilon. 2 Sh. Bashir Ahmed. 3. Sh. S. N. Bhardwaj. 4. Sh. C. M. Bhagchandani. 5. Sh. Brij Mohan. 6. Smt. Geeta Bhardwaj. 4. East Delhi District:- 1. Sh. Om Parkash Arora. 2. Sh. Sh. V. P. Bhardwaj. 2. Sh. Surinder Singh Sethi. 3. Sh. Karan Singh. 4. Sh. Lekh Ram. 3. South West Delhi District: 1. Sh. R. K. Dhilon. 2 Sh. Bashir Ahmed. 3. Sh. S. N. Bhardwaj. 4. Sh. C. M. Bhagchandani. 5. Sh. Brij Mohan. 6. Smt. Geeta Bhardwaj. 4. East Delhi District:- 1. Sh. Om Parkash Arora. 2. Sh. Bajrang Singh. 3. Sh. Vinod Shanna. 4. Sh. Jawahar Lal Goyal. 5. Sh. B. C. Jain. 6. Sh. Dharmendra Kumar Jain. 5. North Delhi District:- 1. Sh. A. K. Rohatgi. I Sh. V. K. Singhal. 6. North West Delhi District:- 1. Sh. Prem Kumar Khosla. 2. Sh. Inderjeet Singh Gulati. 3. Sh. M. C. Sharma. 4. Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma. 5. Sh. Satya Narain Gupta. 7. Central Delhi District:- 1. Sh. Amar Nath Mago. 2. Sh. Ashok Kumar Bhakri. 3. Sh. Zabeer Mian. 4. Sh. Rajendra Kumar Gupta. 8. North-East Delhi District:- 1. Sh. G. D. Sharma. "it was then recorded that there were no vacancies in West Delhi District as per the notary-population,andlhatin addition to the above 29 persons, the case of Harji Lal Jad was being processed separately as a Jandk migrant. Then the note in the office of the competent authority records as under :- "over and above these, 10 vacancies remain unfulfilled (3 in New Delhi, 3 in South-West Delhi and 4 in North-West Delhi) for non-availability of eligible applications. It is proposed that aginst these vacancies, persons from the list given in Annexure B, placed on file may be appointed. This list comprises remaining applications found to be eligible on basis of merit (i. e. applicants having a shorter period of stay than those proposed for appointment above ). The list has been prepared police sub-division wise in descending order of merit. It is proposed that these appointments be made on the basis of contiguity and proximity to ensure that there is overall uniformity in the norms applied for this purpose. "the final recommendation is then made by the Deputy Commissioner, Delhi, by his note as under :- "so far 90 licences for Notaries have been issued for the Union Territory, 60 by Delhi Administration and 30 by Government of India. 2. 60 additional vacancies have since been created under the orders of Government of India. Out of them, 20 licences are to be issued by the Government of India and 40 by Delhi Administration. 2. 60 additional vacancies have since been created under the orders of Government of India. Out of them, 20 licences are to be issued by the Government of India and 40 by Delhi Administration. 3. As required under the Notaries Act, 1952 and Rules, appiciations were invited through a public notice by the undersigned who is the Competent Authority for the purpose under the Rules. 4. 136 valid applications were received. These have been processed and a list of recommended persons is put up for final orders by the Administration. 5. While processing these applications, the following points have been taken into consideration :- (a) The Notaries should be as widely located as possible considering the con venvenience of the citizens. (b) Considering that the total number of notarics will become 100 and the population of the city is more than 9 million people, one notary has been allocated for one lakh of population. For the purpose of allocation, a Police District has been treated as a unit. Thus, 100 Notaries have been distributed amongst 9 Districts on the basis of one notary for every one lakh of population. (c) Where the number of eligible applicants was more than the allocated scats available in a District, preference has been given to candidates with longer residence in the ara. 6. Accordingly, 32 persons as per their particulars in the statement a placed below are recommended for appointment. Beside, another list of applicants (whose particulars are contained in statement b ) have been recommended in the descending order of preference district-wise. 7. It is propsed that the recommendation may be accepted and Law Department authorised to issue licences to the 32 candidates included in statement a . 8. This will leave the following vacancies in the Districts indicated against each:- Name of District Number of Vacancie. " 1. New Delhi 3 2. South-West Del 3 3. North-West Delhi 2* * (0n the basis of proximity and contiguity 2 vacancies in North-West District have been filled from West-Delhi District where there were no vacancies at all ). 9. It is suggested that the remaining eight vacancies of notaries could be filled up either from amongst the remaining eligible persons (List b ) or could be kept vacant for being filled up from amongst persons of merit as and when available. 9. It is suggested that the remaining eight vacancies of notaries could be filled up either from amongst the remaining eligible persons (List b ) or could be kept vacant for being filled up from amongst persons of merit as and when available. sd/- (ARUN MATHUR) D. C. (DELHI) " ( 6 ) LIST a was, thus, notified in the Official Gazette and respondents 4 to 35 became entitled to be appointed as Notaries. In the notification, however, there is no mention for which particular district the successful candidate was found eligible. ( 7 ) WE have already noticed the important functions which a Notary has to perform and these he can do only when he is fully qualified and competent. Appointment of a Notary is not an ordinary matter. A great deal of formalities have to be gone into before a person could be appointed as Notary. Recommendations by the competent authority to the appropriate Government for appointment of a person as a Notary has to be made on the basis of the norms mentioned in sub-rule (3) of Rule 7. We find that these provisions have been given a complete go by. Importance of the functions of a Notary and the qualifications toperform these functions have not been given any consideration at all while recommending the appointment. Even the appointing authority without any further application of mind. whether the competent authority considered all the relevant circumstances, notified the impugned appointments. A new system outside the law has been evolved to recommend appointment of a person merely on the basis of number of years he or she has been residing in a particular area. The words "ordinarily resident in the area" have been read to mean the number of years a person has been residing in the area. No comparative study of individual merit of the persons found eligible has been considered. No regard at all has been given to the knowledge and experience of commercial law, and the extent of the practice of the legal practitioners so appointed has at all not been taken into account. We find the process of selection in the present case is arbitrary. Undue consideration, rather the only consideration, for recommending has been the length of period of residence in a particular locality. This would appear to be rather incongruous. We find the process of selection in the present case is arbitrary. Undue consideration, rather the only consideration, for recommending has been the length of period of residence in a particular locality. This would appear to be rather incongruous. For example take the case of a lady legal practitioner, having a vast practice in commercial law, after marriage comes to reside in a particular area with her husband and may be residing there only for a period of a year or so. On account of the criteria adopted by the respondents 1,2 and 3 she cannot compete with another legal practitioner having no practice or having a little practice in commercial law but residing in that area for more number of years than that lady advocate. Such type of method is per se unreasonable. Clauses (a) and (c) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 clearly stand violated. Again it was pointed out to us that when the original recommendations were made by the competent authority on 16 March 1992, the name of Mrs. Geeta Deshraj (Bhardwaj ?) was not recommended for appointment in the South-West District and her case was rejected on "merit". It was stated before us that she is the wife of Mr. Ram Kawar Dhillon and both having the same residential address. The period of stay in the case of Ram Kawar Dhillon is shown as 13 years and that of Mrs. Geeta Deshraj 5 years. Appointment was to be made from this district of4notariesand recommendations were to appoint persons having 13,15,20and21 years of stay in this district. There were 12 applicants in this district and applicants at serial No. 4,5,6,17 and 12 were rejected on varying grounds and those at serial No. 2 (Mrs. Geeta Deshraj), 3 and 8 were rejected on "merit" and recommendation was for applicants at serial No. 1 (Mr. Ram Kawar Dhillon), 9, 10 and 11 having period of stay as abovementioned. When second time recommendation is made, 6 persons have been recommended for appointment in this district which included the name of Mrs. Geeta Deshraj. Obviously, one person with longer period of stay does not find mention in this list and rather husband and wife have been selected which would in principle violate clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of. Rule 7. When second time recommendation is made, 6 persons have been recommended for appointment in this district which included the name of Mrs. Geeta Deshraj. Obviously, one person with longer period of stay does not find mention in this list and rather husband and wife have been selected which would in principle violate clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of. Rule 7. ( 8 ) WE are also of the opinion that same consideration could certainly have been given to the commercial importance of the area while fixing the number of Notaries for each police district. This is particularly so when the Gazette Notification also does not show if a Notary so appointed is for whole of Delhi or for any particular police district. Rule 8 of the Rules also stands violated. We, however, need not refer to other arguments respecting the comparative merit of the candidates who have been appointed or not. It is not for us to lay down any guidelines as to how the process of selection could have been gone into, but we feel perhaps it would have been better to associate a senior Additional District and Sessions Judge during the process of selection. The competent authority must devise proper method to judge the comparative merits of the candidates as prescribed byclause (c) of Rule 7 (3) of the Rules. ( 9 ) FOR the purpose of this petition it is not necessary for us to refer to the notings in the file regarding some more appointments during the intervening period though we do find that in those cases proper procedure was not followed. In one such cases the appointment has been made on the ground that the applicant belongs to Scheduled Caste category and in the other that he is physically handicapped to a certain extent These are not the qualifications prescribed for appointment as a Notary. ( 10 ) THUS, we find that the appointment of respondents 4 to 35 as Notaries is against the provisions of law and the impugned notification No. F. 17/5/91 -Judl. dated 30 April 1992 is struck down. Petitioner will be entitled to costs. Counsel fee Rs. 2,000. 00.