IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 17876 of 2009. [O&M] Date of Decision: 1st October, 2010. Jagir Singh & Anr. Petitioners through Mr. Hardip Singh, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mr. H.S.Brar,Addl.AG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioners seek quashing of the notice dated 27.10.2009 [Annexure P-7] whereby they have been asked to pay `1 lac towards the deficiency of stamp duty charges, failing which the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The petitioners' precise is that the demanded amount has already been deposited by them in the Bank and they possess a Bank receipt to this effect. The record suggests that the additional stamp duty has been levied upon the petitioners without hearing them or any show cause notice. The impugned order dated 27.10.2009 [Annexure P-7], thus, can not sustain and is accordingly quashed, leaving it open to the respondents to issue a fresh notice to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders after hearing them in accordance with law. Suffice it to say that the petitioners shall be at liberty to show the bank receipt etc. in support of the fact that the subject amount has already been deposited by them but the same appears to have been misappropriated by the authorities. As regard the prayer of the petitioner for holding an inquiry, this Court has already issued directions vide order dated 1.2.2010 in CWP No. 18767 of 2009 [Ropan Ghai & Anr. v State of Punjab & Ors.]. The respondents shall abide by those directions and take appropriate action, in accordance with law, against the guilty officials. Disposed of. Dasti. October 01, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE