IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 538 of 2009. Uttarakhand Infrastructure and Developers (Pvt.) Ltd. Through Ravindra Kumar, S/O Sri Kailash Chandra, R/O Devband Road, Rampur Maniharan, District Saharnpur, U.P. ...Petitioner. Vs. State of Uttarakhand through Collector Haridwar, District Haridwar and three others. ...Respondents. Ms. Prabha Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondents. Date April 10, 2009. P.C.: Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard Ms. Prabha Noliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- 1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the notice dated 21-3-2009 issued by respondent no.2. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 3 & 4 to collect stamp duty from the petitioner of Khata no;. 26 khasara no. 921 kha Rakba no. 0.0200 Hect., Khaarano. 1033 na Rakaba 0.614 Hect. And khasara no. 1080 da Rakba 0.510 Hect. Total 1/5 part i.e. 0.137 Hect. According to the stamp duty payable for agricultural land. 3. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 3 & 4 to stay the order and effect of notice dated 21-3-2009 issued by respondent no.3. 4. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the representation dated 9-3-2009 within stipulated time frame. 5. To pass any other and further orders, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner. A perusal of the record shows that reference for deficient stamp duty was made by Sub Registrar Laksar vide Annexure-6 to the Additional Collector (Finance and Revenue) Hardwar. It seems that the stamp case might have been transferred by the Additional Collector for disposal to Up Zila Adhikari /Assistant Collector 1st Class Laksar. On the basis of the report of Sub Registrar Laksar, notice for demand of deficient stamp duty on the sale deed which was executed on 5-3-2009 (copy Annexure-5 to the writ petition) by the vendor in favour of the petitioner was issued on 21-3-2009 by Up Zila Adhikari/Assistant Collector 1st Class Laksar and the petitioner was directed to file objection regarding the under valuation of the land in question. The case was registered as Stamp Case No. 97/2008-2009. The petitioner has alternate remedy to file objection against the notice and the said Stamp Case has to be decided by the Assistant Collector concerned. Thereafter, the petitioner has a right to file revision before the Commissioner/Chief Revenue Commissioner as per its pecuniary jurisdiction. Therefore, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition on the ground of alternate remedy. No other point was raised or argued before this Court that the notice is without jurisdiction. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed on the ground of alternate statutory remedy available to the petitioner. However, if the petitioner files objection against the impugned notice, the learned Assistant Collector shall decide the objection expeditiously without necessary delay in the matter as far as possible. No order as to costs. (B.S. Verma,J.) RCP