V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a writ petition filed under Article 226 ofthe Constitution seeking a writ, order or d irection more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No. 1 in insisting upon payment of stamp duty and registration fee on the basis of the market value as on the date of the sale deed dated 31 -3 -1995 instead of the actual consideration as illegal and without jurisdiction and a direction to respondent No. 1 to register the document presented for registration and alternatively to direct Respondents No. 2 and 3 to pay the deficit stamp duty payable, if any.

( 2 ) THE facts as emerging from the affidavit of the partner of the petitioner-firm are that the land bearing T. S. No. 1992, Block no. 25, Ward No. 5 measuring 3311. 58 sq. Yards situated in Annapoornammapeta, rajahmundry belonged to Endowments department. The petitioner took the said land on lease for 35 years in the year 1958 vide registered document No. 4025/58 and then constructed a cinema theatre and he has been enjoying the same all along. While so, the Government took a policy decision to sell the endowment properties to the existing lease holders in the year 1987and accordingly a High Power Committee to work out the modalities for the sale of those lands including the fixation of price was constituted. The said High Power Committee held a meeting on 6-5-1988 after giving notice to the petitioner-firm vide letter dated 17-2-1988 and after hearing all concerned, fixed the market value of the land at Rs. 300/- per sq. Yard and further imposed a condition that another sum of Rs. 90/- over and above a sum of Rs. 300/-per Sq. Yard shall be paid towards solatium at 30% of the price. The petitioner accepted the offer under a letter dated 20-5-1988 and subsequently the High power Committee again met on 14-6-1988 and confirmed the sale at that rate i. e. , rs. 390/- per Sq. Yard towards the price and solatium. After confirmation of the sale by high Power Committee notice was issued to the petitioner on 12-7-1988 for payment of the price fixed as above and accordingly four partners of the petitioner- firm paid Rs. 1,04,000/- each towards their respective contributions to Respondent No. 3 under receipts bearing No. 469 to 472 dated 15-8-1988. The total sum paid by them is rs. 4,16,000/- being 173rd of the total amount payable towards price as well as the solatium. The remaining 2/3rd amount was payable on 15-4-1989 and it was also paid under receipts no. 69 to 72, dated 15-4-1989. Thus, the partners of the petitioner-firm paid a total sum of Rs. 12,91,5167- by 15-4-1989. Respondentno. 3havingreceived the above amount, invested it in a fixed deposit in their name and derived a sum of Rs. 6,04,677/- by way of interest by 5-1-1994. However, respondents No. 2 and 3 have not taken any steps to execute the sale deed in favour of the partners of the petitioner-firm though the petitioner-firm pursued the matter with the above respondents. Respondent No. 3, however, obtained necessary approval from his superiors and executed a sale deed on 31-3-1995 and the same was presented for registration on 31-3-1995 before Respondent no. 1 herein. It is asserted that the entire sale transaction was conducted through Official receiver of the Government and hence absolutely there is no possibility of suppressingaconsideration. Yet, Respondent no. 1 started insisting for payment of stamp duty and registration fee as per the market value as on the date of presentation of the sale deed. According to the petitioner, section 47-A of the Stamp Act cannot be invoked in such a case. It is also asserted that the concept of market value is alien to the stamp duty and the concept of stamp duty as introduced in this country and which is in vogue since its inception and as is recognised by the Constitution it is a tax on the instrument on the basis of its actual consideration. Therefore, the taxation on the basis of the market value of the property wh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document