[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Setu Forum Corporation Through Its ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 18 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17192/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17192 of 2025
================================================================
SETU FORUM CORPORATION THROUGH ITS PARTNER BHARAT
CHANDRAPRAKASH PATHAK
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MP PRAJAPATI(677) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR NIKUNJ KANARA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 18/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a
direction to quash and set aside the notices dated 19.02.2025,
07.03.2025 and 28.05.2025 as well as the order dated
25.06.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 calling upon the
petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty.
2. Mr. M.P.Prajapati, learned advocate for the petitioner
submits that the present proceedings have been initiated on the
basis of a private complaint. He submits that such a complaint
was never forwarded to the petitioner. He submits that the
respondent authorities could not have initiated proceedings on
the basis of such third party information. He submits that the
notices dated 19.02.2025 and 07.03.2025 came to be issued to
the petitioner. The petitioner filed its reply to the said notices
before the respondent No.2. Pending the said proceedings,
another notice came to be issued to the petitioner on 28.05.2025
by the Collector and Additional Superintendent of Stamps. He
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17192/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2025
undefined
submits that without affording any opportunity of hearing, the
respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order calling upon
the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty along with penalty
and interest thereon.
2.1 In support of his contention, learned advocate for the
petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in case of
Hardik Sunilbhai Agrawal v. Prant Officer, Kadi - Special Civil
Application No.3038 of 2023 and other connected matters
decided on 13.03.2023, wherein it has been held that the
respondent authorities on receipt of the objections could not
have entered the same in the Register of Disputed Cases, but
could have independently considered such objections on the
basis of the material received and thereafter, consider the same
and/or refer it to the concerned competent authority for taking
further actions in accordance with law if such material appears
to be violative of any other law. The respondent authorities also
could have directed to such third party to make such application
before the competent authority for breach of any law for the
transaction of transfer of right on the land. He submits that the
said judgment of learned Single Judge has been affirmed by the
Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated 04.01.2024 in Letters
Patent Appeal Nos.723 of 2023 and other connected matters. He
submits that in view thereof, the present proceedings be
quashed and set aside.
3. Considered the submissions. In the present case, the
petitioner has efficacious statutory alternative remedy by way of
appeal before the respondent No.1 - Chief Controlling Revenue
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17192/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2025
undefined
Authority. The petitioner has not availed the same. It is well
settled law that when the statutory alternative remedy is
available, the same has to be exhausted first. Therefore, this
Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. The
petitioner shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings
under the statute before the appellate authority.
4. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the
merits of the case nor any opinion is expressed thereon. All the
contentions raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition
are kept open to be agitated before the appellate authority.
The present Special Civil Application is accordingly not
entertained and disposed of. No order as to costs.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
