Ram Kishore Agarwal and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhinava Upadhya, J.—The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed u/s 47A(3) dated 17.8.2004 and the order passed u/s 56(1A) of the Indian Stamp Act dated 18.2.2010 in the appeal filed by the petitioners against the order of the Collector.

From the order passed u/s 47A (3) of the Act, it is apparent that the notices were issued to the petitioners and were duly served upon them yet inspite of notice the petitioners did not contest the matter before the Collector in the proceeding initiated u/s 47A (3) of the Act and, therefore, the Collector proceeded ex-parte and determined the deficiency in the stamp duty. Against the said order the petitioners preferred appeal, which was also dismissed. Hence, the present writ petition.

This is settled principle of natural justice that before proceeding in any matter opportunity must be given to the affected persons to contest the proceeding. This opportunity was made available to the petitioners but they refused to avail the same and, therefore, they themselves are responsible for the order that has been passed. Therefore, the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for fault of the petitioners themselves.

The writ petition is misconceived and it is, accordingly, dismissed.