JUDGMENT :

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr.Jay Trivedi learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.

2. With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

3. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenge is to the orders dated 30.05.2015 passed by the respondent no.1 and dated 24.02.2014 by the respondent no.2. The consequential prayer is that the additional stamp duty of Rs.28,94,085/- and interest amount which is Rs.5,79,360/- be refunded.

4. Facts in brief would indicate that the assets of M/s. G.T.C.L. Mobile-cum-Technologies Limited (‘GTCL’ for short) were mortgaged to Dena Bank towards the loan secured by the said company. Since GTCL could not repay the loan to the bank, the properties were put to auction wherein the petitioner offered a bid of Rs.7,21,00,000/- which was accepted by the High Court vide order dated 13.01.2009 passed in Company Application No.619 of 2008. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter the Court passed an order directing the bank to cooperate with the applicant company in entering into a sale deed. Accordingly the sale