Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 08.04.2021, passed by the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Purnea Division, Purnea i.e. the respondent no.3, in Stamp Case No.1 of 2020, whereby and whereunder the petitioners have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.29,92,000/- on the head of deficit stamp duty along with a sum of Rs.2,99,200/- on the head of penalty charges, totaling to a sum of Rs.32,91,200/-. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing of the appellate order dated 23.11.2022, passed by the Ld. Court of Divisional Commissioner, Purnea i.e. the respondent no.2, in Deficit Stamp Appeal No.298 of 2021, whereby and whereunder the appeal has been dismissed on the ground of non-deposit of 50 % of the amount of deficit stamp duty along with penalty charges, as has been directed to be paid by an order dated 08.04.2021, passed by the respondent no.3.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioners are that the petitioners purchased a piece of land situated at Circle- Purnea East, Mauza- Lakhan Jhardi, Thana No.97, Ward No.36, appertaining to Khata No.60, Khesra No.591/647, admeasuring 1 acre 20 decimal, by a sale deed which was registered by the Office of the District Sub-Registrar, Purnea i.e. the respondent no.5 on 01.07.2020, after making payment of the requisite stamp duty and registration charges. It is stated that the land in question was disclosed as a progressive agricultural land in the sale deed and since there was no entry muchless any categorization of the land in question in the Minimum Valuation Register (MVR), the petitioners had declared the value of the land in question, by way of sale consideration, to be a sum of Rs. 40 lacs, relying upon the use of the land and the value of the adjoining land. It appears that the respondent no.5 had referred the matter to the respondent no.3 for determination of the category of the land in question as also for calculation of the deficit stamp duty, whereupon Stamp Case No.1 of 2020 was instituted by the respondent no.3 and then the impugned order dated 08.04.2021 has been passed, directing the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs.32,91,200/-, on the head of deficit stamp duty and penalty charges. The petitioners had then challenged the aforesaid order dated 08.04.2021, before the respondent no.2, by filing an appeal bearing Deficit Stamp Appeal No.298 of 2021, however, the same has been rejected vide order dt. 23.11.2022 on the ground of non-deposit of the statutory amount by the petitioners while preferring the said appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has, at the outset, submitted that mere perusal of Form-I, prepared by the respondent no.5 for referring the matter to the respondent no.3 under Section 47(A)(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 1899’), would show that the land in question is a progressive agricultural land and it has been recorded therein that though the land of the petitioners is situated next to Brick Flat Soling survey road, which falls under the category of branch road, however the land of the petitioners is in the form of a pond like ditch where Makhana is being cultivated and is surrounded by farms, nonetheless the land in question has been deemed to be falling under the residential branch road category, which is illogical.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the petitioners have already paid the stamp duty and registration charges as per the prevalent market value as applicable to the agricultural lands, hence they are not liable to pay any further amount in terms of the provisions of the Act, 1899 or in terms of the Bihar Stamp (Prevention of under valuation of Instruments) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules, 1995’). It is specifically stated that Rule 5 & 6 of the Rules, 1995 provides that it is the Collector of the district who is obliged in law to classify the lands of Rural/Urban a