JAYANT NATH, J.

CM No. 12634/2016 (exemption)

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 3012/2016 and CM No. 12633/2016 (directions)

1. The present Public Interest Litigation is filed seeking the relief of mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to enquire into the issue of evasion of stamp duty subsequent to 11.11.2011 in the offices of the Sub-Registrars being respondents No. 4 to 20 pertaining to General Power of Attorneys executed in favour of persons other than blood relations under Article 48 (c) of Schedule IA of the Indian Stamp Act (as applicable to Delhi) which otherwise ought to have been registered under Article 23A or 23 of the Schedule. Other connected reliefs are also sought.

2. The petitioner is a practicing advocate. He submits that in Delhi there are two modes of conveyance/transfer of immovable properties i.e. by execution of the sale deed or by Special Power of Attorney (SA)/General Power of Attorney (GPA)/WILL.

3. A reference is made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Haryana & Anr., 2012 (1) SCC 656 where the Supreme Court held that an immovable property could be legally and lawfully transferred/conveyed only by registered deed of conveyance and that GPA sales did not convey any title.

4. Reliance is also placed on two circulars dated 12.11.2014 and 26.02.2015 issued by respondent No.1 regarding caution in registering GPAs.

5. The petitioner points out that one of his client presented a GPA for registration on 07.11.2013 in the office of respondent No.16. The said GPA was presented and stamped with a stamp duty of Rs.100/-i.e. the stamp duty payable for a GPA. On 04.07.2014 the petitioner’s client received information that the GPA has been impounded under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act and the original document has been sent to respondent No.3 for necessary action under Section 40 of the Act. Respondent No.3 pursuant to the orders passed by this High Court on 29.09.2014 in W.P.(C) No. 6708/2014 filed by the petitioner’s client passed an order on 02.12.2014. By the said order, the impounded GPA of the petitioner’s client was held to be a sale of immovable property requiring the stamp duty under Article 23(A) of Schedule IA of the Indian Stamp Act. A penalty was also imposed on the petitioner’s client. Thereafter, the petitioner’s client is said to have filed a revision petition before respondent No.2 wherein respondent No.2 vide order dated 02.07.2015 waived the penalty but imposed interest@ 2% per annum on the amount of Rs.3,41,435 from the date of the execution of the GPA up to the date of payment.

6. It is the contention of the petitioner that the GPA of the petitioner’s client was impounded whereas other similar GPAs were being allowed to be registered in favour of persons other than blood relations by paying stamp duty as a GPA. However, respondent No.2 allowed the petitioner to inspect the documents pertaining to November 2013 to July 2014 in the office of respondent No. 16.

7. It is the further contention of the petitioner that GPA’s are being executed for fulfillment of certain contractual obligations by and between executants for valuable considerations. It is further submitted that on inspection, he was able to discover 48 GPA’s pertaining to immovable properties which have been registered as GPA resulting in a loss of approximately of Rs.15 crores to the Government Exchequer. It is urged that this was only in one of the offices of the Sub-Registrar and that the total loss of all the Sub-Registrar Offices would be enormous. It is in this background that the present writ petition has been filed seeking enquiry into GPA’s executed in favour of the persons other than blood relations which otherwise ought to have been registered under Article 23 A or 23 of the Act.

8. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

9. A power of attorney is defined in the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, which reads as fol