IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22205 of 2010 Between: Smt. M. Pushpa … Petitioner And The Govt., of A.P., rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Dept., Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Y. Neelakanta Reddy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22205 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to refund the sum of Rs.30,000/- allegedly paid by the petitioner in excess towards the stamp duty. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing the respondents. The petitioner availed loan of Rs.11,80,000/- from the A.P. Grameena Vikas Bank, Manur Branch for mortgaging her property, hypothecation of stocks etc. A simple mortgage deed was executed in respect of the landed property admeasuring Ac.9.30 ¾ guntas. The petitioner alleged that in connection with registration of the mortgage deed, respondent No.4 insisted her to pay the stamp duty at 3.5% on the loan amount of Rs.12 lakhs. Accordingly, she paid Rs.42,095/- through challan dated 06.07.2010 and got the mortgage deed registered. According to the petitioner, after registration of the document, she came to know that under G.O.Ms.No.409, dated 11.05.2010, the Government has reduced the stamp duty on simple mortgages falling under Article 35(b) of Schedule IA of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 from 3% to 0.5%. The petitioner made a representation on 13.07.2010 to the District Collector with copies marked to respondent Nos.3 and 4 requesting for refund of the excess stamp duty paid by her. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far the excess stamp duty has not been refunded. If the facts stated by the petitioner are correct and if her case falls under Article 35(b) of Schedule IA, she is liable to pay the stamp duty at 0.5% only. If the petitioner paid excess stamp duty, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are bound to refund the same to her. In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent Nos.3 and 4 to consider the petitioner’s representation and refund the excess stamp duty to her, if her case falls under Article 35(b) of Schedule IA within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If respondent Nos.3 and 4 opine that the petitioner’s case is not covered by G.O.Ms.No.409, dated 11.05.2010, one of them shall communicate the decision to that effect with supporting reasons to the petitioner. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.28285 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 06.09.2010. ES