IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 8534 of 2009. Date of Decision: 29th May, 2009. Gora Lal Petitioner through Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mr. Palwinder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. Palwinder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab, accepts notice. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed in the writ petition and the order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to ask the respondents to file their counter-affidavit. The petitioner is aggrieved at the orders dated 2.1.2008 and 15.4.2009 passed by the Collector, Patiala and the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala respectively, whereby he has been asked to affix an additional stamp duty to the tune of Rs.46,472/- in respect of a sale deed registered on 23.8.2007. The solitary contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that even before the impugned orders could attain finality, the State of Punjab has amended the Punjab Stamp [Dealing of undervalued Instruments] Rules, 1983 whereby the following explanation to Rule 3-A has been inserted:- “Explanation:- The consideration amount fixed at the time of allotment of immovable property by any Government/Semi Government Organization shall be deemed to be the Collector's rate and the stamp duty shall be charged for registration of document upon the consideration amount fixed by the Government/Semi Government, provided that document is got registered by the original allottee within three months from issue of this notification or within three months from the payment of last regular installment as per Schedule of payment of such allotment”. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons contained in the order dated 25.5.2009 passed in CWP No. 8004 of 2009 [Food Corporation of India v State of Punjab & Ors.], the writ petition is allowed to the limited extent that the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Collector, Patiala to re-consider the petitioner's case in the light of the Rules as amended on 2.3.2009. If the Collector holds that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the amended rule, suffice it to say that the petitioner can not be asked to affix the additional stamp duty. If the Collector, however, holds otherwise, a speaking order may be passed. The needful shall be done as early as possible and preferably within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. Disposed of. Dasti. May 29, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE