Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Vikram Nath, Ashutosh J. Shastri, JJ.
Manish Jitendrakumar Shah - Petitioner
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 16221 of 2019 With R/Special Civil Application No. 16370 of 2019 With R/Special Civil Application No. 16539 of 2019 With R/Special Civil Application No. 16545 of 2019 With R/Writ Petition (PIL) No. 170 of 2019 With R/Special Civil Application No. 20297 of 2019
Decided On : 24-07-2020
Civil Law – Gujarat Stamps Supply and Sales Rules, 1987 – Rule 8A – Indian Stamp Act, 1899 Section 75 – Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 – Section 70 – E-Stamping Security Certificate – Enacting legislation as its guiding force in order to determine vires of provision – This group of six petitions has been filed primarily for the relief to declare Rule 8A of the Gujarat Stamps Supply and Sales Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1987 Rules) as ultra vires to the provisions of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1899 Act”) and the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 – It is pertinent to note that vide communication dated 12th December, 2012, the Government of India, requested the Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat, to give priority and consider taking necessary steps for the implementation of e-stamping and also to make e-stamping mandatory – It is also stated in the affidavit dated 16.11.2019 filed by the Respondent State that since the publication of the notification dated 07.09.2019 published in the Government Gazette, out of 1559 registered licensed vendors, 1024 have applied for licenses as Authorized Collection Centers. Out of these 1024 vendors who have applied for licenses as Authorized Collection Centers, 715 Stamp vendors have been issued User ID and passwords after making agreement with SCHIL, of which 466 vendors are already functional. As there are 474 existing Authorized Collection Centers and 1177 New Authorized Collection Centers for issuance of e-stamping certifications, which includes the licensed stamp vendors. It is contended by the some of the petitioners that in the interior villages internet facilities may not be available. It is noteworthy that the Stamp vendors operate only at Taluka Level. Internet facilities are made available at every Taluka across the State.
Facts of the Case:
Present issue that has been raised before us has given us the opportunity of scanning the anatomy of a provision with the lens of pragmatism and has further enabled us to examine how law responds to the needs of the society and how law has been proactive in embracing advancement in technology. The nature of law is dynamic, responding to the ripples of societal change and law cannot under any circumstances, be anachronistic. At this juncture, we would like to quote the famous words of the Greek Philosopher, “Heraclitus”, who had said that “The only constant in life is Change”. And the same applies to law, as well, upon which rests the burden of maintaining order in society and it is this ever changing and vibrant nature of law that preserves the basic fabric of the society. There are many instances in the legal arena, where due to certain societal changes, law has had to respond by evolving effectively.
Finding of the Court:
It is pertinent to note that vide communication, the Government of India, requested the Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat, to give priority and consider taking necessary steps for the implementation of e-stamping and also to make e-stamping mandatory – It is also stated in the affidavit filed by the Respondent State that since the publication of the notification published in the Government Gazette, out of 1559 registered licensed vendors, 1024 have applied for licenses as Authorized Collection Centers. Out of these 1024 vendors who have applied for licenses as Authorized Collection Centers, 715 Stamp vendors have been issued User ID and passwords after making agreement with SCHIL, of which 466 vendors are already functional. As on 14.11.2019, there are 474 existing Authorized Collection Centers and 1177 New Authorized Collection Centers for issuance of e-stamping certifications, which includes the licensed stamp vendors. It is contended by the some of the petitioners that in the interior villages internet facilities may not be available. It is noteworthy that the Stamp vendors operate only at Taluka Level. Internet facilities are made available at every Taluka across the State.
Result: Civil Applications dismissed
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM NATH, J.
1. Two caveats before we commence to discuss the issues raised and their adjudication.
2. The present issue that has been raised before us has given us the opportunity of scanning the anatomy of a provision with the lens of pragmatism and has further enabled us to examine how law responds to the needs of the society and how law has been proactive in embracing advancement in technology. The nature of law is dynamic, responding to the ripples of societal change and law cannot under any circumstances, be anachronistic. At this juncture, we would like to quote the famous words of the Greek Philosopher, “Heraclitus”, who had said that “The only constant in life is Change”. And the same applies to law, as well, upon which rests the burden of maintaining order in society and it is this ever changing and vibrant nature of law that preserves the basic fabric of the society. There are many instances in the legal arena, where due to certain societal changes, law has had to respond by evolving effectively.
3. The law relating to stamp duty for the state of Gujarat has undergone changes at periodical intervals, with the introduction of franking machines in the year 1999, receipted challans or certificate issued under the e-stamping system in the year 2007 and now with the elimination of the use of non-judicial physical stamp paper, a new era in this field of law has been ushered and this is a classic example of how law and evolution go hand in hand.
4. The approach of the Court in examining the constitutional validity of a provision of law is well-settled. While being confronted with an issue such as the one that has been raised in the present litigation, the Court must use the “raison d’etre”, i.e. object and purpose of enacting the legislation as its guiding force in order to determine the vires of a provision. We must strive to give such an interpretation as will explore in its entirety, the nexus of the provision with the object of the Act. If the provision under scrutiny is in sync with the “raison d’etre” of the main enactment, then as alleged by the petitioners a minor transgression by the Executive sans any material implication, will not stand in our way of upholding the constitutional validity of such provision.
5. This group of six petitions has been filed primarily for the relief to declare Rule 8A of the Gujarat Stamps Supply and Sales Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1987 Rules) as ultra vires to the provisions of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1899 Act”) and the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1958 Act”). The reliefs claimed in the six petitions are incorporated hereunder:
“(A) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and hold and declare that rule 8A of the Sales Rules is ultra vires to the provision of the IS Act.
(B) Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to stay the implementation, execution and operation of the impugned rule 8A of the Sales Rules.
(C) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.”
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16370 OF 2019:
"(A) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and hold and declare that rule 8A of the Sales Rules is ultra vires to the provision of the Stamp Act.
(B) Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to stay the implementation, execution and operation of the impugned rule 8A of the Sales Rules.
(C) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.”
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16539 OF 2019:
“(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to admit and allow this petition;
(B) Your Lordsh
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
