M.M. Kumar, J. - (1.) THIS petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for issuance directions to respondent No. 1 to consider and decide the legal notice dated 23.5.2006 (P.6) submitted by the petitioners with a further direction to take appropriate action against respondent No. 2 under the Notaries Act, 1952.
(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner at some length and perused the paper book. Before disposing of this writ petition we would refer to the views of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India : (2005) 6 SCC 344. In paras 38 and 39 of the judgment it has been required that whenever notice under Section 80 C.P.C. or under any similar provision is sent then it is mandatory on the part of State or Central Government or other authorities to send reply to such notice. It is well settled that before seeking a direction or a writ of mandamus, justice demand notice is required to be served on the respondents as has been done in the present case. The petitioner had served a legal notice dated 23.5.2006 (Annexure P.6), to which no reply is stated to have been received. It has also been observed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court that in cases where such like notice has not been replied then cost is required to be imposed. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition, at this stage, with a direction to the respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the legal notice dated 23.5.2006 (Annexure P.6) by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(3.) THE petition stands disposed of in the above terms.;