Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35180 of 2010 Petitioner :- Ayodhya Prasad Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- D.N. Gupta,V.K. Gupta Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Earlier the High Court has remanded the matter to the Commissioner for
determining the nature of the land in dispute and then to determine the
deficiency in the payment of stamp duty.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the land in
dispute is agricultural in nature and the Commissioner in its order records that
at the time of inspection the land was found to be under cultivation but even
then without therebeing any declaration that the land is of non-agricultural
use, deficiency has been determined by treating it to be non-agriculture.
Learned Standing counsel prays for and is allowed six weeks’ time to file
counter affidavit. Two weeks’ thereafter are allowed to the petitioner for filing
rejoinder affidavit.
List thereafter.
The petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- out of the
deficiency of Rs.2,13,300/-.
In view of above, until further orders of this Court, the operation of the
impugned orders dated 27.04.2010 and 29.01.2009 shall remain stayed.
Order Date :- 22.7.2010
piyush