Allahabad High Court
Saleem vs State Of U P And 2 Others on 20 February, 2025
Author: Piyush Agrawal
Bench: Piyush Agrawal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24796 Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23174 of 2020 Petitioner :- Saleem Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Digvijay Singh,Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
2. By means of instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the judgment and order dated 15.02.2020 passed by the the Additional Commissioner, Stamp/Collector Stamp, Moradabad, in Case No. 03763/2018; Computerized Case No.D201813540003763 and order dated 03.09.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Stamp, Moradabad, in Appeal No. C201913000000421.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide registered sale deed dated 11.07.2018, the petitioner purchased an agricultural land after paying requisite stamp duty in accordance with the prevalent circle rate. Thereafter, on the basis of an ex-parte report, the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act were initiated and a notice was issued to which the petitioner submitted his objection/reply, but not being satisfied with the objection, impugned order dated 03.09.2020 was passed against which an appeal was filed, which was dismissed without considering the material available on record. Hence, this writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of execution of the sale deed, the plot in question was an agricultural land and after its purchase, the same was being used as an agricultural land meaning thereby there is no change in its use.
5. He further submits that neither any residential activity in the vicinity of plot in question were there nor the land in question has been declared as an abadi land as required under Section 143 of the UPZA & LR Act. He further submits that the said grounds have specifically been taken in paragraph no.15 of the writ petition, which have not been denied in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State.
6. Per contra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel supports the impugned orders.
7. After hearing the parties, the Court has perused the record.
8. The record shows that at the time of execution of the sale deed, the property in question was shown to be an agricultural land, however, on the basis of an ex-parte report, the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act were initiated, treating the land in question as non-agricultural land.
9. Further, the specific pleading in para no.15 of the instant writ petition has been made that the land in question has not been declared as an abadi land as required under Section 143 of the UPZA & LR Act, but the same has not been denied in the counter affidavit so filed on behalf of the State.
10. This Court in the case of Prayag Dant Vigyan Anusandhan Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. (Writ-C No. 15140 of 2019), has taken a view that the property being not declared as an abadi land as required under Section 143 of the UPZA and LR Act, the proceedings U/s 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act cannot be initiated against the petitioner treating the land in question as non-agricultural land.
11. In view of the above facts as stated as well as law laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the matter requires re-consideration.
12. Accordingly, the impugned orders cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and the same are hereby quashed.
13. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remanded to the authority concerned for deciding afresh by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after hearing all the stakeholder, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
14. Any amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned orders, shall be subject to the outcome of the fresh order to be passed by the authority concerned.
Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Pravesh Mishra