Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1063020/2008 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10630 of 2008
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
KARAMSHIBHAI
SHAMJIBHAI KAKADIYA & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
BM MANGUKIYA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.MS BELA A
PRAJAPATI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MS BHAVIKA KOTECHA, AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
Date
: 26/08/2008
ORAL
JUDGMENT
Rule.
Ms. Kotecha, learned AGP waives notice of rule.
In
the present petition, the challenge of the petitioners is against
the order passed by the Deputy Collector dated 17.02.2003
(Annexure-D) for assessment of deficit Stamp Duty of Rs.1,10,420/-
with penalty of Rs.250/- and Rs.500/-, total Rs.1,11,120/- and its
confirmation thereof by the appellate authority vide order dated
01.12.2007 (Annexure-E) in Appeal No.68/07.
Mr.Parikh,
learned AGP under the instruction of GP states that the State
Government has taken decision to reconsider all cases, where the
Deputy Collector has exercised the power in mechanical manner,
without considering the facts and circumstances pertaining to all
document presented prior to December 2006. However, learned Asst.
Government Pleader states that the matter may be remanded to the
Deputy Collector as if the appeal is allowed, and Deputy Collector
shall decide the matter afresh. She only submitted that the
petitioners may appear before the Deputy Collector within two weeks
from today.
As
the document is presented prior to cutoff date, the present case
would be covered in the general policy and the declaration made on
behalf of the State Government, which has been recorded in Special
Civil Application No.10177 of 2008, decided on 08.08.2008.
In
view of the above declaration made on behalf of the State
Government, the impugned order passed by the Deputy Collector for
assessment of the stamp duty as well as the order of Appellate
Authority confirming the order of the Deputy Collector is quashed
and set aside with the direction that the matter shall stand
restored to the Deputy Collector.
The
petitioners shall appear before the Deputy Collector within two
weeks from today. The Deputy Collector shall decide the matter in
accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the
petitioners and shall pass the order.
It
is hardly required to be clarified that when the order is quashed,
there shall not be any recovery until afresh order is passed by the
Deputy Collector. In the event, if the petitioner is aggrieved by
afresh order, which may be passed by the Deputy Collector, the
petitioner may resort to remedy as may be permissible in law.
The
petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute
accordingly. D.S.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.)
*bjoy
Top
