SCA/1003420/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10034 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 ? ========================================================= BABUBHAI LAXMANBHAI PATEL & 1 - Petitioner(s) Versus DEPUTY COLLECTOR STAMP DUTY VALUATION DEPT. & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR BALRAM D JAIN for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. None for Respondent(s) : 1, MS BHAVIKA KOTECHA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 08/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Ms. Kotecha learned AGP waives service of SCA/1003420/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT notice of rule for the respondents. 2. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard. 3. The petitioners by way of this petition has challenged the order dated 28.05.2003 at Annexure-A passed by the Deputy Collector, whereby the Stamp Duty is assessed at Rs.1,11,460/- plus penalty of Rs.250/-, total Rs.1,11,710/-. 4. Heard Mr.Jain learned Counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Kotecha, learned AGP for the respondents. 5. 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 she submitted that the implementation of the order shall not be made, and she has no objection, if the order is quashed and the matter is restored to Deputy Collector, but the petitioners may remain present before the Deputy Collector within some reasonable time for showing cause as to why the assessment could not be made. 6. The reference may be made to the statement made SCA/1003420/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT in the proceedings of Special Civil Application No. 3926 of 2006 and allied matter. 7. In view of the above, impugned order passed by the Deputy Collector dated 28.05.2003 is quashed and set aside with the direction that the matter shall stand restored to the Deputy Collector. The petitioners shall submit reply within four weeks. The Deputy Collector shall decided the matter afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in accordance with law. 8. 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 petitioners are aggrieved by afresh order, which may be passed by the Deputy Collector, the petitioners may resort to remedy as may be permissible in law. 9. The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute accordingly. D.S. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) *bjoy