Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1543/2005 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1543 of 2005
To
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1550 of 2005
With
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3246 of 2005
==============================================================
GUL
K.ACHHRA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DY.COLLECTOR
& 1 - Respondent(s)
==============================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PRASHANT G DESAI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR VM PANCHOLI AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
==================================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 10/10/2005
ORAL
ORDER
1.0 The
petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the impugned order
dated 31.12.2001 passed by respondent no.1 as also the order dated
16.04.2004 passed by respondent no.2, whereby the applications
preferred by the petitioners to prefer appeal by granting permission
to deposit 12.5% of the ordered amount instead of 25% as provided
under the proviso of Section 32(B) of the Bombay Stamp Act (for
short, ?Sthe Act??) were rejected.
2.0 It
is the case of the petitioners that the impugned orders have been
passed by the respondent authority without affording any opportunity
of being heard and without considering the materials placed before it
in support of their case. In short, it is their contention that the
impugned orders have been passed in clear violation of the principles
of natural justice and complete non-application of mind.
3.0 I
have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
placed on record. When the statutory authority has been empowered to
hear the appeal against the order of the Deputy Collector, the
authority ought to have taken a practical view of the matter and
ought to have considered the appeal on merits. It is required to be
noted that the higher authority is required to consider the decision
of the lower authority on merits in order to give substantial justice
to the parties.
3.1 In
view of the above, the impugned order dated 31.12.2001 passed by
respondent no.1 as also the order dated 16.04.2004 passed by
respondent no.2 are quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to
the Appellate Authority for decision afresh. The Appellate Authority
is directed to decide the said application of the petitioners for
granting exemption u/s. 32(B) of the said Act in accordance with law
and after hearing the petitioners as early as possible. Since the
appeal in question would be time-barred, the Appellate Authority
shall decide the delay condonation application on merits instead of
rejecting the same on technicalities. With the above directions, the
petitions stand disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent with no order as to costs.
(K.
S. JHAVERI, J.)
pravin/
*
Top