Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/12372/2010 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12372 of 2010
=========================================================
RELIABLE
TECHNOCAST PVT LTD - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DEPUTY
COLLECTOR & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
RC KAKKAD for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
MS JIRGA
ZAVERI AGP for Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 29/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Mr. RC Kakkad on behalf of petitioner, learned AGP
Ms. Jirga Zaveri appearing for respondent state authority.
Rule.
Learned AGP Ms. Zaveri appearing for respondent waives service of
notice of Rule on behalf of respondent. With consent of both
learned advocates, matter is taken up for hearing.
The
brief facts of present petition are that Deputy Collector, Stamp
duty Valuation has passed an order on 24/8/2001 which is at page 41
Annexure B. Against which, appeal was preferred by petitioner
before Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Annexure E page 45. The
said appeal has been examined by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
in Stamp Appeal under section 32(B) being no. 779/2002 Annexure F
dated 8/1/2002.
The
Chief Controlling Revenue Authority has set aside order passed by
Deputy Collector dated 24/8/2001 by order dated 8/1/2002 and
remanded matter back to Deputy Collector to decide it afresh.
Thereafter, again order has been passed by Deputy Collector after
receiving remand order from Chief Controlling Revenue authority on
7/7/2002 annexure G page 51. Immediately on 12/7/2002 appeal was
preferred by petitioner before Chief Controlling Revenue authority
page 53 Annexure H. That appeal remained pending before Chief
Controlling Revenue authority. Inspite of number of representations
and request made by petitioner to Chief Controlling Revenue
authority, appeal is not decided by Chief Controlling Revenue
authority. Vide letter dated 6/3/2006 page 57, 14/6/2007 page 58,
6/6/2008 page 59, 16/6/2008 page 60, 3/9/2009, 21/1/2009, 9/2/2009,
6/4/2009 and 12/7/2010, on number of occasion, such request was made
to Chief Controlling Revenue Authority to decide appeal no.
1182/2002. All of sudden, without application of mind answer has
been given by Deputy Collector Stamp Duty Valuation, Rajkot Division
2 (Rural) in July, 2010 page 71 that appeal which was preferred by
petitioner against order dated 7/7/2002, on 12/7/2002 is considered
to be beyond time limit. Absolutely, this order suffers from non
application of mind. Apparently, appeal was preferred by petitioner
in time challenging order passed by Deputy Collector dated 7/7/2002
on 12/7/2002. Therefore, appeal preferred by petitioner is within
time limit as required under provision of Bombay Stamp Act.
Considering
facts, which are on record being undisputed between parties, order
which has been passed by respondent Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty
Valuation, Rajkot Division II (Rural) page 71 and July 2010 is
hereby quashed and set aside with a direction to Chief Controlling
Revenue Authority to decide appeal no. 1182/2002 preferred by
petitioner against order passed by Deputy Collector dated 7/7/2002
on 12/7/2002 in accordance with law.
It
is further directed to Chief Controlling Revenue Authority to decide
this appeal after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to
petitioner. Then to pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance
with law within a period of four months from date of receiving copy
of present order.
Accordingly,
present petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent. Direct service is permitted.
(H.K.RATHOD,
J)
asma
Top