Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/8869/2008 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8869 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 ?
=========================================================
RAJ
ASSOCIATION AND NON TRADING CORPORATION - Petitioner(s)
Versus
THE
DEPUTY COLLECTOR & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
BALRAM D JAIN for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1,
MS
BHAVIKA KOTECHA, AGP for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
Date
: 18/07/2008
ORAL
JUDGMENT
Rule.
Ms. Bhavika Kotecha learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for
the respondents.
With
the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the
matter is finally heard.
The
petitioner by way of this petition has challenged the order passed
by the Deputy Collector dated 24.02.2005 whereby the stamp duty is
assessed at Rs. 1,18,004/-.
Heard
Mr. Jain learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Kotecha learned
AGP for the respondents.
Ms.
Kotecha 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, and he submitted
that the implementation of the order shall not be made, and he has
no objection, if the order is quashed and the matter is restored to
Deputy Collector, but the petitioner may remain present before the
Deputy Collector within some reasonable time for showing cause as to
why the assessment should not be made.
In
view of the above, impugned order passed by the Deputy Collector
dated 24.02.2005 is quashed and set aside with the direction that
the matter shall stand restored to the Deputy Collector. The
petitioner shall submit reply within four weeks. The Deputy
Collector shall decided the matter afresh after giving opportunity
of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law.
Ms.
Kotecha learned AGP submitted that the reference may be made to the
statement made in the proceedings of Special Civil Application No.
3926 of 2006 and allied matter.
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 petitioner aggrieved by a fresh
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.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.)
Suresh*
Top