Allahabad High Court
Ayush Singhal vs The Board Of Revenue ... on 20 February, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 109 of 2023
Petitioner :- Ayush Singhal
Respondent :- The Board Of Revenue Thru.Chairman And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijai Krishna,Sabita Lahiri
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard.
The present petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:-
"(I) Summon the records of the case and thereafter issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of "Certiorari" to quash the impugned order dated 11/01/2023 passed by the Opposite Party no. 1 in Case no: SREV/871/2019/Lucknow- Ayush Singhal Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and the impugned order dated 29/03/2019 passed by the Opposite Party no. 2 in Computerised case no: D-20171046011708- State Versus Ayush Singhal; a copy of which is contained in Annexure nos. P-1 and P-2 respectively to the writ petition.
(II) issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of "Mandamus" thereby commanding the Opposite Parties to refund the money @ Rs. 6,21,469.00 (Rs. Six lac twenty one thousand for hundred sixty nine only) deposited by the Petitioner before the Opposite Party no. 1; a copy of which is contained in annexure no. P-8 to the writ petition; alongwith suitable interest as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court, in the interests of justice."
Learned Counsel for the petitioner, stated that as per the notification no. 24/2016/889/94 ???????-2-16-500(05)/91?????? dated 16.09.2016, the Revision under Section 56 of Indian Stamp Act, 1899, related to value of stamp duly in the dispute exceeding rupees 25 lakhs would lie before the Member Judicial Board of Revenue and a revision which relates to valuation upto 25 lakhs is maintainable before Deputy Commissioner of Stamps of concerned Division/Circle and in the instant case the revision was preferred before opposite party no. 1-Board of Revenue at Lucknow and considering the valuation of the revision i.e., Rs. 9,05,050/-, the opposite party no.-1-Board of Revenue, Lucknow, dismissed the revision on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction though the same ought to have been returned back to the petitioner for filing the same before the appropriate authority. In support of his submissions reference has been made to the judgment dated 08.01.2013 passed in Writ-C No. 206 of 2013 (Mohammad Anwar Versus State of U.P. and Others). In this view of the matter, the interference of this Court is required.
Learned State Counsel has not disputed the aforesaid aspect of the case.
By means of the impugned order dated 11.01.2023 the authority concerned i.e., opposite party no.1-Board of Revenue, Lucknow, has dismissed the revision the issue related to pecuniary jurisdiction, which is justified. However, he has not provided the liberty to the present petitioner to prefer the same before the appropriate authority as indicated hereinabove in the notification dated 16.09.2016.
Accordingly, the impugned order is modified. The petitioner is permitted to prefer the revision before the Deputy Commissioner of Stamps, Lucknow Division, Lucknow, assailing the order dated 29.03.2019 passed by Assistant Commissioner Stamps (First), Lucknow and for the same the opposite party no.1-Board of Revenue, Lucknow is directed to return the memo of revision to the petitioner within three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
For the relief no. 2, the petitioner is permitted to peruse his case before appropriate authority.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 20.2.2023
Jyoti/-
