The Collector has no jurisdiction to determine the value of the property for stamp duty purposes under Section 47-A of the Act, where the document is chargeable on the consideration set forth in the instrument.

M. C. JAIN, J.

( 1 ) THE State of Rajasthan has filed this writ petition for quashing the order of the Board of Revenue dated December 19, 1972 (Ex. 8) whereby it quashed the order of the Collector, Bika-ner, dated September 6, 1971 (Ex. 6) as being without jurisdiction.

( 2 ) THE present writ petition relates to the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 (Act No. VII of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ).

( 3 ) I may advert to the relevant facts in brief.

( 4 ) A deed of sale was executed on the 9th day of September, 1970, by Maharaja Shri Kami Singh, Ex-Ruler of Bikaner State (respondent No. 1), through his lawful attorney Maharai Kumar Shri Narendra Singh (respondent No. 2) in favour of Kami Charitable Fund Trust, Bikaner (respondent No. 3 ). Land measuring 19,23,803 sq. ft. situated within Lallgarh Palace area was transferred by the aforesaid sale deed for a consideration of Rs. 10,000/ -. The document was presented for registration before the Sub-Registrar, Bikaner, on 9-9-1970 and the Sub-Registrar, Bikaner, made a note after perusal of the document that the rate of the land situated around the Lallgarh Palace area is much more and so the consideration, said to have been received in the document, is not acceptable being untrue and incorrect. The value of the land sold is much more than what has been shown in the sale deed. In order to save the stamp duty the document has been undervalued by showing less consideration. It was stated that after registration of the document, the document will be sent to the Collector, Bikaner, under Section 47-A of the Act for realisation of the deficit stamp duty. After registration of the document the Sub-Registrar submitted a report Ex. 3 to the Collector, Bikaner. It was expressed in the report that the site plan annexed with the document, had an endorsement of the word gift and the same has been erased and in its place the word sold has been written, therefore, the document is a gift, so it should have been valued for purposes of stamp duty under Rule 33 on the market value of the land and the word sold has been used for the purpose of saving the stamp duty. It was also written by the Sub-Registrar that even if the document is considered to be a sale deed, still the document has been undervalued by mentioning lesser consideration. The prayer was to make an inquiry under Section 47-A and thereafter the deficit stamp duty may be recovered. The required evidence shall be produced at the time of the inquiry.

( 5 ) ON the above report of the Sub-Registrar, a notice (Ex. 4) was issued to the respondent No. 1 under Section 47-A of the Act, whereby the respondent No. 1 was called upon to give the correct valuation of the land sold and he was also called upon as to why sanction for prosecution under Section 64 (a) be not given. It was stated in the notice that in the document the value of the property sold has not been correctly stated and the property has been undervalued in order to save stamp duty, Thus, Section 27 has been contravened.

( 6 ) A reply to the notice (Ex. 5) was filed, in which it was stated that consideration of the document has been correctly stated and a lesser consideration has not been shown. The learned Collector, after hearing the parties ordered on September 6, 1971, that the Superintending Engineer, P. W. D. (B. and R.), Bikaner, should proceed on the spot and assess the value of the land and submit his valuation report within one month of the receipt of the order. Dissatisfied with this order of the Collector respondent No. 1 approached the Board of Revenue under Section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as adopted in Rajast-han. The Board of Revenue, after hearing the parties, quashed the order of the Collector as being without jurisdiction. Aggrieved against the order of the Board of Revenue, the State of Rajast-han has filed this writ petition on the ground, which I shall proceed to consider hereinafter.

( 7 ) MR. R. P. Dave, learned Dep