Civil Writ Petition No. 1962 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 1962 of 2009 Date of Decision: 22.10.2009 Smt. Kamlesh Gupta …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Smt. Kamlesh Gupta has filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of order dated 30.1.2008 (Annexure P1) passed by the District Collector, Ludhiana, along with the order dated 10.9.2008 (Annexure P2) passed by the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, in appeal whereby order (Annexure P1) was affirmed. The only question which this Court has been called upon to determine is that whether the District Collector can arrive at a conclusion that the land which was described in the sale deed as agricultural land is a residential land because it was lying vacant. Civil Writ Petition No. 1962 of 2009 2 Before this question is adjudicated, it will be necessary to recapitulate brief facts of the case. Petitioner Kamlesh Gupta purchased 4 kanals 15 marlas of land situated at village Sangowal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, vide sale deed No. 14204 dated 29.11.2007. Petitioner had paid the requisite stamp duty on the sale deed as per the Collector rate and had described the land as agricultural. There is no dispute that in case land is taken to be agricultural, there is no deficiency in the payment of stamp duty. After the registration of the sale deed, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon her to pay the deficiency in the stamp duty as the land which was purchased by her is a residential in nature and different rates have been prescribed by the Collector qua the residential land. Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner has read the following findings of the District Collector:- “As per the copy of Girdawri which was produced the Khasra Nos. mentioned by the Sub Registrar are vacant. These numbers cannot be considered as agricultural area rather the same should be considered as residential area. As per the above said sale deed land measuring 4 kanal 15 marlas (2873 Sq. Yards) has been purchased in village Sangowal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. The Collector rate of this residential area has been fixed at Rs.1450/- per sq. Yard and thus the total value of the land which is purchased comes to Civil Writ Petition No. 1962 of 2009 3 Rs.41,65,850/-. The parties have got the document registered at Rs.8,90,630/- as consideration”. The District Collector, in order to arrive at the decision that land is not agricultural but residential, had resorted to reasoning that since land is vacant, it must be assumed that it is residential. In appeal, the Commissioner has stated that “it has also been pleaded that the land in question is agricultural land. I am not in agreement with the contentions of the present appellant as she has tried to evade the stamp duty”. Petitioner has filed an additional affidavit in which she has stated that land in question is agricultural and the same is also used for agricultural purposes. In the affidavit she has further given an undertaking that the land will be only used for agricultural purposes and no construction will be raised on the suit land. Counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon jamabandi (Annexure P3) to contend that in the jamabandi entire land has been described as Chahi. Counsel has further placed on record a site plan to urge that all the lands surrounding the land of petitioner are agricultural in nature. In the present case, the District Collector has made no enquiry. He has not even inspected the spot. No statement of any person was recorded that any residential activity is being carried in the vicinity of the land. Admittedly, in the revenue record, the land is described as agricultural. To say that land is lying vacant, therefore, it is residential, is too naïve to be accepted by the Court. Reasoning given by the District Collector cannot be sustained on the law and facts. Civil Writ Petition No. 1962 of 2009 4 Therefore, the present petition is accepted and the orders (Annexures P1 and P2) are set aside. No order as to cost. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge October 22, 2009 “DK”