IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 655 OF 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 28.01.2004 in WP No. 36092 of 1998 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Revenue Secretary, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others ..... APPELLANTS AND Kesoram Cement, Proprietor, Kesoram Industries Ltd., Basanthnagar, karimnagar District, Rep. By Sri S.V. Thapadia, Joint President, Finance & Admn. and others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) Aggrieved by the order dated 28.01.2004 made in W.P. No.36092 of 1998 allowing the writ petition leaving it open to the appellants herein to charge the stamp duty on the anticipated royalty, in terms of the judgment of this court in A.C.C. Ltd., Vs. Government of A.P. ([1]), the Government is in appeal before us. The first respondent herein filed the above writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus from enforcing the order dated 3.12.1998 passed by the third appellant herein and to direct for the registration of the mining lease in terms of the judgment in A.C.C. Limited case. On presentation of the lease deed for registration, the first respondent herein was informed that the chargeable stamp duty is Rs.4,05,300/- taking into account the dead rent and the anticipated royalty. The learned Single Judge relying on the ACC Limited case, referred to above, allowed the writ petition in terms thereof. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Appeal is filed by the Government. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the appellants herein contends that the decision rendered in M/s. Shri Bhogshwara Cement & Mineral Industries Limited, Rep. By its Managing Director Sri B.M.Daya Shankar Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement & Land Records, Hyderabad and others ([2]) was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge, which held that where the value of the subject matter is indeterminate and such a subject matter is in respect of a lease granted by or on behalf of the Government, then such amount or valuation would be taken by the Collector having regard to all the circumstances of the case and the Collector has to estimate the amount which is likely to be payable (obviously, in future) by way of royalty or a share to the Government and the whole of such royalty or share which shall be claimable under such lease shall be the valuation for the purpose of stamp duty. Learned counsel for the first respondent herein conceding that the above judgment was not cited before the learned Single Judge, sought remand of the matter for adjudication on merits. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in view of the fact that the chargeable stamp duty taking into account the dead rent and the anticipated royalty is determined at Rs.4,05,300/-, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) on or before 31.12.2009. However, such deposit is subject to the result of the writ petition, to be adjudicated on merits by the learned Single Judge. Consequently the Writ Appeal is allowed and the matter is remanded to the learned Single Judge for passing orders afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to both the sides. The Registry is directed to list the writ petition before the learned Single Judge after Sankranthi Vacation, 2010. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari __________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar December 21, 2009 MAS. [1] AIR 1981 A.P. 320 [2] 1988(2) ALT 271