S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks the following declarations and reliefs:

(a) That the Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction and declare that the Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy and Amendment) Act, 2013 insofar as it enacts the Stamp Act Amendment (Exhibit A) is ultra vires and void on account of being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and being beyond the legislative competence and power of the State Legislature and also for being vague, arbitrary and irrational and be pleased to quash the same.

(b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction to declare that the Maharashtra Act No. X of 2012 insofar as it enacts Registration Act Amendments (Exhibit B) is ultra vires and void on account of not only being repugnant to sub-section (f) of Section 58 of the Transfer of Property Act but also being vague, arbitrary and irrational and be pleased to quash the same.

(c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction to quash and set aside the Circular dated August 8, 2013 (Exhibit C) issued by Respondent No. 2 on account of the same being ultra vires, void and invalid and be pleased to quash the same.

(d) For a writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction from this Hon'ble Court directing the Respondents as well as their officers, servants and agents to refrain/abstain from taking any steps in furtherance or implementation or enforcement of the Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy and Amendment) Act, 2013 insofar as it enacts the Stamp Act Amendment (Exhibit A).

(e) For a writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction from this Hon'ble Court directing the Respondents as well as their officers, servants and agents to refrain/abstain from taking any steps in furtherance or implementation or enforcement of the Maharashtra Act No. X of 2012 insofar as it enacts the Registration Act Amendment (Exhibit B).

2. The petitioners have approached the Court in certain peculiar circumstances according to them for they are ten banks and financial institutions and one of the respondents, other than the statutory authorities, is the Indian Banks' Association claiming to be an Association of Banks having office at Mumbai.

3. The petitioner Nos. 5 and 6 claim to be the shareholders of Yes Bank Limited and State Bank of India and ICICI Bank.

4. The Stamp Act Amendment came into force on 1st May, 2013, vide the Notification bearing No. VAT 1515/C.R.57/Taxation-1 dated 25th April, 2013.

5. The Registration Act Amendments came into force on 1st April, 2013 vide the Notification bearing No. RGN-2012/ C.R.20/M-I dated 7th March, 2013.

6. The respondent No. 2 addressed a circular dated 8th August, 2013, to all the banks and financial institutions notifying them about the Stamp Act Amendment and the Registration Act Amendments. Paragraph 2.1 goes even beyond the amendments in stating that if the intimation is not filed, the mortgage cannot be enforced and is thus being contrary to the Registration Act Amendment and is thus ex-facie without any authority in law and unlawful inasmuch as it is clearly in violation of the Registration Act Amendment.

7. Section 30 of the Stamp Act provides as to who shall be responsible to bear stamp duty, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, in case of instruments described in Clauses (a) to (g) therein.

8. The business and activities of all banks and financial institutions is regulated by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and accordingly the RBI is the sole regulator of the banking business and activities of