Uttarakhand High Court
State Of Uttarakhand And Others vs Graphic Era Educational Society on 18 June, 2016
Equivalent citations: AIR 2016 UTTARAKHAND 91, (2016) 132 REVDEC 749, (2016) 3 UC 1792, (2017) 120 ALL LR 386
Bench: K.M. Joseph, V.K. Bist
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Special Appeal No. 634 of 2015
State of Uttarakhand & others. .....Appellants
Versus
Graphic Era Educational Society. .......Respondent
Mr. Anil K. Joshi, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/
appellants.
Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Mohd. Matloob, Advocate for the
respondent.
Dated: June 18, 2016
Coram: Hon'ble K.M. Joseph, C.J.
Hon'ble V.K. Bist, J.
K.M. Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The respondents State of Uttarakhand & others are the appellants in this appeal. By Government Order, the writ petitioner was given permission to purchase land for establishing a Medical College. On the basis of the permission granted by the Government, the writ petitioner purchased various parcels of land situated in Vikas Nagar, District Dehradun. The sale deeds were registered by the Sub- Registrar and were being delivered to the petitioner/ purchaser, but when sale deed dated 18.07.2014 was executed and presented for registration, it was accepted for registration, but the Sub-Registrar refused to deliver the sale deed for the reason that the stamp paid by the petitioner was insufficient in view of the order dated 06.06.2014 passed by the first respondent.
2The stamp is to be paid on the commercial rate, was the stand of the Authority. The writ petitioner thereupon filed the writ petition feeling aggrieved and it sought certiorari quashing the order dated 06.06.2014 and the notices issued by the fourth respondent- Collector Stamp/Additional District Magistrate, Dehradun. Direction was sought also to handover the registered sale deeds to the writ petitioner. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition. He found that the stamp duty is to be calculated on the basis of market value of the property as on the date of execution of sale deed. He found that the order impugned, namely, order dated 06.06.2014 was, in fact, contrary to the earlier orders of the State of Uttar Pradesh of the years 1997, 1999 and also that of the State of Uttarakhand of the year 2009. The argument of the State based on Section 154 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 was repelled and, after quashing the impugned order, the writ petition was disposed of finally directing that writ petitioner would give reply to the show cause notices and a final decision is to be taken in accordance with law on the basis of the observations made. It was clarified that it would be open to the Authorities to see as to whether market value of the property is assessed as per the circle rates fixed by the Collector on the agricultural land and stamp duty paid thereon is sufficient. Feeling aggrieved, appellants are before us.
2. We heard Mr. Anil K. Joshi, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand/ 3 appellants and also Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Mohd. Matloob, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner/ respondent.
3. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel would submit that actually, this is a case where the Court lost sight of the impact of the Uttarakhand Amendment to Section 154 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. He would submit that the land, which is subject matter of the dispute, was actually agricultural land. Without the permission granted by the Government, there would be no title with the writ petitioner to carry out its object of setting up of a Hospital & Medical College. Therefore, he would submit that there was justification for demanding the stamp duty on the basis of the use to which the land would be put by the writ petitioner. He would submit that the order dated 06.06.2014 clearly provided for contingency where the agricultural land is meant to be utilized for a commercial purpose or for setting up of a Hospital, as the writ petitioner indeed intended to and intends to do and for which the permission was sought and obtained from the Government. Furthermore, he would submit that the show cause notices were issued under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Without responding to the show cause notices, petitioner has rushed to this Court. He would refer us to Rule 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997. He would contend that in terms of Rule 4, the District 4 Magistrate has fixed one rate for agricultural land and another rate for non-agricultural land and the petitioner is bound to pay the circle rate fixed for non- agricultural land.
4. What is in issue in this case is the question as to what is the basis for fixing the value for the purpose of payment of stamp duty. At this juncture, it is necessary to notice, in fact, the Government Order issued by the State of Uttarakhand dated 05.06.2009. The purport of the said order is that the future use of the land will not be taken into consideration, but the state of the land and market value as on the date of the sale deed will alone be considered. Order dated 06.06.2014 passed by the Additional Chief Secretary reads as follows:
"No. /XVII(9)/2014/Stamp-31/2009 From, Rakesh Sharma, Additional Chief Secretary, Uttarakhand Government To, Inspector General, Registration, Government of Uttarakhand.
Finance Section-9 Dehradun date 06th June, 2014 Sub: Regarding clarification of charging of Stamp Duty by the registration officer at the time of execution of sale deed of proposed land and duty as may be charged in future.
Sir, You are hereby informed on the above subject that in the past orders have been passed vide Uttarakhand Government letter No. 5 211/XXVII(9)/Stamp/2009 dated 05th June, 2009 and U.P. Government Order No. K.Ni.-5-1420/11-99 dated 16th August, 1999 and Government Order No. K.Sa.Vi.-5-3090/11-97 dated 25th September, 1997 that what shall be the expected use of immovable properties in future or what is the purpose of the purchaser in purchasing the land and accordingly Stamp duty may be prescribed taking in account the value of the immovable property.
2. Informations have been received from some Districts and it has been revealed that in compliance of the orders of Government office of the Sub-Registrar while through such documents for specific performance the land is purchased and the valuation of such properties may be ascertained as per such orders.
In reference as above orders of Uttarakhand Government and in supersession of its letter No. 211/XXVII(9)/Stamp/2009 dated 05th June, 2009 and U.P. Government Order No. K.Ni.-5-1420/11-99 dated 16th August, 1999 and Government Order No. K.Sa.Vi.-5-3090/11-97 dated 25th September, 1997. It is directed that in the case of execution of such documents in which purpose of purchase is clear then valuation of that land will be done in accordance with rates specified for that.
Yours faithfully (Rakesh Sharma) Additional Chief Secretary"
5. Thus, the purport of the order appears to be what shall be the expected use of immovable properties in future or what is the purpose of the purchaser in purchasing the land, is what is to be taken into consideration, and stamp duty is to be prescribed taking into account the value of the immovable property accordingly. The Government Order dated 25.09.1997 and Government Order dated 16.08.1999 of the State of Uttar Pradesh and also the Government Order dated 05.06.2009 of the Uttarakhand 6 Government are stated to be superseded and the purpose test is laid down for determining the market value. It is the said order, which has been quashed by the learned Single Judge.
6. Learned Senior Counsel for the respondent would support the judgment. He would submit that the writ petitioner has actually paid the stamp duty in terms of the circle rate fixed by the Collector under Rule 4 of the agricultural land and, in fact, the documents were also registered and the documents were held back on the basis of the impugned order. He would also submit that the issue has received the attention of this Court and also the Allahabad High Court and the principle of law is that stamp duty shall be determined on the basis of market value as on the date of the execution of the sale deed.
7. As far as the argument based on Section 154 amendment is concerned, it is necessary to refer to Section 154 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, insofar as, it is applicable to the State of Uttarakhand. Section 154 reads as follows:
"154. Restriction on transfer by a bhumidhar-(1) Save as provided in sub-section (2), no bhumidhar shall have the right to transfer by sale or gift, any land other than tea garden to any person where the transferee shall, as a result of such sale or gift, become entitled to land which together with land, if any, held by his family will in 7 the aggregate, exceed 5.0586 hectares (12.50 acres) in Uttar Pradesh.
[Explanation- For the removal of doubt it is hereby declared that in this sub-section the expression "person"
shall include and be deemed to have included on June 15, 1976 a "Co-
operative Society":
Provided that where the transferee is a Co-operative Society, the land held by it having been pooled by its members under Clause (a) of sub- section (1) of Section 77 of the Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 shall not be taken into account in computing the 5.0586 hectares (12.50 acres) land held by it.] (2) Subject to the provisions of any other law relating to the land tenures for the time being in force, the State Government may, by general or special order, authorize transfer in excess of the limit prescribed in sub-
section (1) if it is of the opinion that such transfer is in favour of a registered co-operative society or an institution established for a charitable purpose, which does not have land sufficient for its need or that the transfer is in the interest of general public.
Explanation- For the purposes of this section, the expression 'family' shall mean the transferee, his or her wife or husband (as the case may be) and minor children and where the transferee is a minor also his or her parents.
[(3) For every transfer of land in excess of the limit prescribed under sub-section (1) prior approval of the State Government shall be necessary:
Provided that where the prior approval of the State Government is not obtained under this sub-section, the State Government may on an 8 application give its approval afterward in such manner and on payment in such manner of an amount, as fine, equal to twenty five per cent of the cost of the land as may be prescribed. The cost of the land shall be such as determined by the Collector for stamp duty.] [Provided further that where the State Government is satisfied that any transfer has been made in public interest, it may exempt any such transferee from the payment of fine under this sub-section] [UTTARAKHAND] AMENDMENT [(3) A bhumidhar with transferable rights may sell his land to any of the categories of tenure holders in the State of Uttaranchal as mentioned in Section 129 or such owner of any immovable property in Uttaranchal who has acquired it on or before 12.09.2003 or to any member of the 'family', which means husband, his wife and their children, including step or adopted children, and includes parents, grandparents, brothers and unmarried, widowed, separated and divorced sisters of such tenure holder of the owner, as the case may be.
[(4)(1)(a) Subject to other restrictions and save as otherwise provided in this Act, "any person for his own or on behalf of his family (which means husband, his wife, minor children, unmarried sons, unmarried daughters and dependent parents) even though he is not a tenure holder under Section 129 or the owner of any immovable property in Uttarakhand, may purchase land not exceeding 250 sq. mts. for residential purpose in his lifetime without the permission;] 9
(b) A registered agreement to sell the land executed on or before 12.09.2003 shall be valid if the sale deed on the basis of such agreement is executed on or before 31.03.2004, irrespective of any time limit provided in the agreement, unless extended by the Collector of the district for reasons to be recorded in writing.
(2) Nothing in sub-section 154 (3) shall be deemed to prohibit the transfer of land by any person in favour of-
(a) the State Government or Central Government or a Government company, as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 or a Statutory Body or Corporation or Board established by or under a Statute and owned and controlled by the State or Central Government;
(b) a person who has become a non-tenure on account of-
(i) acquisition of his land for any public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894;
or
(ii) vestment of his land in the tenants under this Act;
(c) a non-tenure holder who purchases or intends to purchase land for the construction of a house or shop or purchases a built-up house or shop from the State Housing Board or from a Development Authority or from any other Statutory Corporation set up under any State or Central enactment;
(d) [***] 10
(e) a person or company according to industrial Policy of Uttaranchal in (i) Intergrated Industrial Development Centre, (ii) Industrial Area, (iii) Industrial Estates;
(f) a person, society or trust for religious purposes;
(g) a landless labourer of the Uttaranchal; or
(h) a landless person belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe of the Uttaranchal; or
(i) a village artisan of the Uttaranchal; or
(j) a landless person carrying on an allied pursuit of the Uttaranchal.
(3)(a) Subject to restrictions contained in Section 154, a person, society or corporate body may purchase land for the following purposes, other than those for Agriculture and Horticulture purposes, with the prior sanction of the Government in the State of Uttaranchal as may be prescribed-
(i) Medical or health purposes, if it conforms to the Health and Population Policy of Uttaranchal;
(ii) Hotel, Lodge, Guest House, Restaurant, Bar, Spa, way side amenities or resort, if it conforms to the Tourism Policy of the State;
(iii) Educational purposes, on the recommendations of the Department of Education;
(iv) Cultural Purposes; and
(v) For industrial purposes in areas other than those mentioned in Section 154(4)(2)(e) or for other purposes.
(b) A person, society or company may purchase land with prior sanction 11 of the Collector of the district for Agricultural or Horticultural purposes, as may be prescribed, on furnishing an affidavit to the effect that such land will be used for Agricultural or Horticultural purposes and for uses incidental to and connected with Agriculture or Horticulture only. If the land use of such land as mentioned in the Affidavit is changed, the said transfer shall be void and consequences of Section 167 shall follow:
Provided that a person who is a non-tenure holder but purchases land either under Section 154 (4)(1)(a), 154 (4)(2)(e) and 154 (4) (2)(f) or under the sanction granted under Section 154(4)(3) shall, irrespective of such purchase of land, continue to be a bhumidhar of special category as provided under Section 129-B and such bhumidhar shall be eligible to purchase land in future only with the permission, of the State Government or Collector of the district as the case may be:
Provided further that such bhumidhar may mortgage or
hypothecate such land for obtaining loan from banks and financial institutions or deriving any other benefit accruing from his bhumidhari rights under Section 129:
Provided further that a non- tenure holder who has purchased land under Section 154 (4)(2)(e), 154(4)(2)(f) and who purchased land under Section 154(4)(3) under the sanction of Government or Collector, as the case may be, shall put land to such use for which the sanction has been granted within a period of two years or further such period as may be allowed by the State Government for reasons to be recorded in writing, to be counted from 12 the date of registration of sale deed and if he fails to do so or diverts the use of the land for which it was sanctioned or transfers the land by way of sale, gift or otherwise except for the purpose for which it was purchased, such transfer shall be void for the purpose of this Act, and consequences of Section 167 shall follow-
(5) Where,-
(a) the Registrar or Sub-Registrar appointed under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 before whom any document pertaining to transfer of land is presented for registration comes to know or has reason to believe that the transfer of land is in contravention of Section 154(3) or 154(4)(3); or
(b) a Revenue Officer either on an application submitted to him or on receipt of any information from any source comes to know or has reason to believe that the land has been transferred in contravention of the provisions of Section 152-A, 154(3), 154(4)(2)(e), 154(4)(2)(f) or 154(4)(3), such Sub-Registrar, Registrar or Revenue Officer, as the case may be, shall make a reference to the Collector of the district, who shall determine whether the transfer is in contravention of the provision of this Act in the manner prescribed and the consequences of Section 167 shall follow in respect of every transfer which is void;
(c)(i) The State Government may, either on the report of a Revenue Officer or on an application by any person or of its own motion, call for the records of any proceedings or case for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of such proceedings 13 or order made therein and may pass such order in relation thereto as it may think fit; and
(ii) No order shall be passed under this sub-section which adversely affects any person unless such person has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard."
8. Undoubtedly, it is acting under Section 154 sub-section 4(3)(a) that the writ petitioner was permitted to purchase agricultural land for the purpose of establishing a Hospital and Medical College. We are at a loss as to how it is open to appellant to contend that in view of the fact that the Government has granted sanction to the writ petitioner to purchase agricultural land under the said section for medical purposes, stamp duty should be calculated on the basis of the purpose to which the land will be put to. There is absolutely no basis for such a contention in the said provision, nor do we find any such basis in the provisions of the Stamp Act, as we shall see more elaborately.
9. Under the Indian Stamp Act, Section 31 provides for adjudication as to proper stamp. Section 32 deals with Certificate by the Collector, where he determines that it is fully stamped inter alia. Section 33 provides for impounding of instruments, which are not duly stamped. Section 47-A under which the show cause notices, which were impugned in the writ petition, were issued being relevant reads as follows:
14"[47-A. Under-valuation of the instrument.- (1)(a) If the market value of any property which is the subject of any instrument, on which duty is chargeable on the market value of the property as set forth in such instrument, is less than even the minimum value determined in accordance with the rules made under this Act, the registering officer appointed under the Registration Act, 1908 shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the said Act, immediately after presentation of such instrument and before accepting it for registration and taking any action under Section 52 of the said Act, require the person liable to pay stamp duty under Section 29, to pay the deficit stamp duty as computed on the basis of the minimum value determined in accordance with the said rules and return the instrument for presenting again in accordance with Section 23 of the Registration Act, 1908.
(b) When the deficit stamp duty required to be paid under clause (a) is paid in respect of any instrument and the instrument is presented again for registration, the Registering Officer shall certify by endorsement thereon, that the deficit stamp duty has been paid in respect thereof and the name and the residence of the person paying them and register the same.
(c) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, the deficit stamp duty may be paid under clause (a) in the form of impressed stamps containing such declaration as may be prescribed.
(d) If any person does not make the payment of deficit stamp duty after receiving the order referred to in clause (a) and presents the instrument again for registration, the registering officer shall, before registering the instrument, refer the same to the Collector, for determination of the market value of the property and the proper duty payable thereon].15
(2) On receipt of a reference under sub-
section (1), the Collector shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after holding an enquiry in such manner as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act, determine the market value of the property which is the subject of such instrument and the proper duty payable thereon.
(3) The Collector may, suo motu, or on a reference from any Court or from the Commissioner of Stamps or an Additional Commissioner of Stamps or a Deputy Commissioner of Stamps or an Assistant Commissioner of Stamps or any officer authorized by the State Government in that behalf, within four years from the date of registration of any instrument on which duty is chargeable on the market value of the property, not already referred to him under sub-section (1), call for and examine the instrument for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the correctness of the market value, of the property which is the subject for such instrument, and the duty payable thereon, and if after such examination he has reason to believe that market value of such property has not been truly set forth in such instrument, he may determine the market value of such property and the duty payable thereon:
Provided that, with the prior permission of the State Government, an action under this sub-section may be taken after a period of four years but before a period of eight years from the date of registration of the instrument on which duty is chargeable on the market value of the property.
Explanation: The payment of deficit stamp duty by any person under any order of registering officer under sub-section (1) shall not prevent the Collector from initiating proceedings on any instrument under sub- section (3)].
(4) If on enquiry under sub-section (2) and examination under subsection (3) the 16 Collector finds the market value of the property.-
(i) truly set forth and the instrument duly stamped, he shall certify by endorsement that it is duly stamped and return it to the person who made the reference;
(ii) not truly set forth and the instrument not duly stamped, he shall require the payment of proper duty or the amount required to make up the deficiency in the same together with a penalty of an amount not exceeding four times the amount of the proper duty or the deficient portion thereof.
[(4-A) The Collector shall also require along with the deficit stamp duty or penalty required to be paid under clause (ii) of sub- section (4), the payment of a simple interest at the rate of one and half percent per mensem on the amount of deficit stamp duty calculated from the date of the execution of the instrument till the date of actual payment:
Provided that the amount of interest under this sub-section shall be recalculated if the amount of deficit stamp duty is varied on appeal or revision or by any order of a competent Court or Authority. (4-B) The amount of interest payable under sub-section (4-A) shall be added to the amount due and be also deemed for all purposes to be part of the amount required to be paid.
(4-C) Where realisation of the deficit stamp duty remained stayed by any order of any Court or Authority and such order of stay is subsequently vacated, the interest referred to in sub-section (4-A) shall be payable also for any period during which such order of stay remained in operation.
(4-D) Any amount paid or deposited by or recovered from, or refundable to, a person under the provision of this Act, shall first be adjusted towards the deficit stamp duty or penalty outstanding against him and the 17 excess, if any, shall then be adjusted towards the interest, if any, due from him.] (5) The instrument produced before the Collector under sub-section (2) or under sub-section (3) shall be deemed to have come before him in the performance of his functions.
(6) In case the instrument is not produced within the period specified by the Collector, he may require payment of deficit stamp duty, if any, together with penalty on the copy of the instrument in accordance with the procedure laid down in sub-sections (2) and (4)]."
9. The contention of the State is that Section 75 provides for Rule making powers and Rules have been made as the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997. Rule 4 deals with the fixation of minimum rate. We extract the same with the modification in view of the amendment made by the Uttarakhand State, which was published in the Gazette of 12.02.2011. Rule 4 (1) and Rule 4 (2) read as follows:
"4- Fixation of minimum rate for valuation of land, construction value of non-commercial building and minimum rate of rent of commercial building.- (1) The Collector of the district shall biennially, as far as possible, in the month of August, fix the minimum value per acre/per square metre of land, the minimum value per square metre of construction of non- commercial building and the minimum monthly rent per square metre of commercial building situated in different parts of the district taking into consideration the following facts;-
(a) in case of land-
(i) classification of soil;
(ii) availability of irrigation facility;18
(iii) proximity to road, market, bus station, railway station, factories, educational institutions, hospitals and government offices; and
(iv) location with reference to its situation in urban area, semi-urban area or countryside;
(b) in case of non-commercial building-
(i) cost of material used in the construction of building;
(ii) labour charges;
(iii) type of construction, age and the depreciation of building;
(c) in case of commercial building-
(i) prevailing rent in locality; and
(ii) nature of economic activity in the locality, (2) The Collector of the district may suo motu or on an application made to him in this behalf, on being satisfied about the incorrectness of the minimum value of land or of the construction of non-commercial building or the minimum rent of a commercial building fixed by him under sub-
rule(1) for reasons recorded in writing, revise the same within a period of two years from the date of fixation of minimum value or rent, as the case may be:
Provided that-
(a) If the Collector of the district while revising the circle rates reduces, keeps the circle rates of a specified area unchanged or enhances the prevailing rates by more than 50%, he shall record the reasons and pass a speaking order.
(b) The State Government may suo motu or on an application made in writing amend, or re-issue the circle rate of any part of the State or of any specific property."
10. It is also apposite to refer to Rule 5, which provides calculation of minimum value. Since we are only concerned with land, we only refer to the portion 19 in Rule 5 dealing with the same. Rule 5 (a) reads as follows:
"5. Calculation of minimum value of land, grove, garden and building.- For the purposes of payment of stamp duty, the minimum value of immovable property forming the subject of an instrument shall be deemed to be such as may be arrived at as follows:-
(a). In case of land- Minimum value Whether agricultural Area of land multiplied or non-agricultural by minimum value fixed by Collector of the district under Rule 4."
11. It is also necessary in our view to refer to Rule 3, as Rule 3 deals with the facts to be set forth in an instrument. Sub-rule 3 deals with the case of buildings. Sub-rule 1 and 2 reads as follows:
"3. Facts to be set forth in an instrument:- In case of an instrument relating to immovable property chargeable with an ad valorem duty, the following particulars shall also be fully and truly stated in the instrument in addition to the market value of the property, -
(1) In case of land-
(a) included in the holding of a tenure holder, as defined in the law relating to land tenures-
(i) the Khasra number and area of each plot forming part of the subject-matter of the instrument;
(ii) whether irrigated or un-irrigated and if irrigated, the source of irrigation;
(iii) if under cultivation whether do- fasali or otherwise;
(iv) land revenue or rent whether exempted or not and payable by such tenure-holder;
(v) classification of soil, supported in case of instruments exceeding twenty 20 thousand rupees in value, by the certified copies, or extracts from the relevant revenue records issued in accordance with law;
(vi) location (whether lies in an urban area, semi-urban area, or countryside); and
(vii) minimum value fixed by the Collector of the district;
(b) being non-agricultural land-
(i) area of land in square metres;
(ii) minimum value fixed by the Collector of district;
(iii) location (whether lies in urban area, semi-urban area, or country- side).
(2) In case of grove or garden-
(a) the nature, size, number and age of trees;
(b) annual recorded land revenue or where the grove is not assessed to any revenue or is exempt from it, the annual rent and/or premium if let out, otherwise the average annual income which has arisen from it during the three years immediately set, preceding the date of the instrument;
(c) area covered by grove or garden;
(d) location (whether lies in urban area, semi-urban area, or country-side)."
12. Rule 4, in our view, clearly does not bear out the case of the appellants. The manner of fixation of the minimum value for land, inter alia, is provided in Rule 4 (1) (a). It provides for the Authority to take into consideration the classification of soil, availability of irrigation facility, proximity to road, market, bus station, railway station, factories, educational institutions, hospitals and Government offices and location with reference to its situation in urban area, semi-urban area or country-side. Therefore, the 21 Collector is not as free as it may be thought of in the matter of fixing the minimum value. The matters, which are relevant and which he is to look into, are specified in Rule 4 in regard to land inter alia. The relevant facts have all been set out. What is conspicuous by its absence in the aforesaid Rules is any reference to the potential use to which the land may be put to as a criterion for fixing the minimum value. The elements, which are embedded in Rule 4, are obviously to be referred to with reference to the situation available at the particular point of time when the minimum value is fixed. It is to be noted that in respect of land, under Rule 5 the rule maker has further elaborated the manner in which the calculation of minimum value is to be done and that is be it agricultural or non-agricultural land, the formula supplied under the Rules is to multiply the minimum value fixed by the Collector under Rule 4 to the area of the land and, thus, arrive at the minimum value. A perusal of Rule 3 also would show that in the statement for the instrument, the aspects, which are relevant on the basis of the matters referred to in Rule 4, must be mentioned. This enables the Authority to find out whether the value is correctly paid. Even in the amendment brought out by the Uttarakhand Government in 2011, besides empowering the Collector to suo motu revise the rate fixed for reasons to be recorded in writing, he may revise within a period of two years from the date of fixation of minimum value subject to what is contained in proviso (a). Clause (b) of the said proviso also enables the Government to suo 22 motu or on application made in writing amend or reissue the circle rate of any part of the State or any specific property. We are emphasizing this aspect, as we would think that the Government, acting through its Additional Chief Secretary, would appear to be bereft of any power to issue an order providing for fixation of stamp duty with reference to the potential use to which the land can be put to.
13. The learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel Mr. Anil K. Joshi, in fact, does not have a case as such that the order dated 06.06.2014 is the product of exercise of powers under Clause (b) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of the Rules. We would think that what is contemplated is the amendment of the circle rate for the part of the State or in respect of a particular property. The order dated 06.06.2014 does not purport to amend the circle rate fixed by the Collector, nor does it purport to amend or reissue the circle rate in respect of any specific property. It merely purports to lay down a new principle, namely, that the stamp duty must be fixed with reference to the purpose for which the land is purchased. A perusal of Section 47- A would reveal that the said provision can be invoked only if the minimum value, as fixed under the Rules, is not paid. If the minimum value, as fixed in the Rules, is paid, then there can be no case for invoking the provision against the writ petitioner in this case. The case of the writ petitioner is that the minimum value, as fixed by the Collector, has been paid. In fact, the learned Single Judge has also in the directions issued 23 left it open to the petitioner to reply to the show cause and to point out that whatever is payable in terms of the minimum value has been paid. The contention of the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel that because permission was granted within the meaning of amendment effected to Section 154 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, the land which is agricultural land will cease to be an agricultural land for the purpose of calculation of stamp duty, can not be accepted. The future use of the agricultural land cannot convert the land at the time of sale from agricultural land to commercial land. It is submitted by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel Mr. Anil K. Joshi that, in fact, statutory provisions contemplated vesting of the land for which permission was granted, if it was not utilized for the purpose for which permission was granted within a particular period. We would think that, that has got nothing to do with the issue as to what stamp duty is to be paid on the purchase of the said land.
14. Therefore, on the conspectus of the provisions of the Stamp Act and the Rules, we would find that there is absolutely no scope for entertaining the contention of the appellants that the purpose for which the land will be put to after its purchase, is relevant for deciding the stamp duty. This aspect, as already noted, is not even part of the matters, which are rendered relevant in view of the provisions of Rule 4, which we have adverted to.
2415. In such circumstances, we see no reason at all to interfere. The Appeal will stand dismissed.
16. There will be no order as to costs.
(V.K. Bist, J.) (K.M. Joseph, C.J.) 18.06.2016 Arpan