JUDGMENT

B.K. NAYAK, J. — The short question that arises for consideration in this writ application is whether the Registering Officer under the Indian Registration Act can retain possession of the original registered instrument (sale deed) where it raises a dispute in terms of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp (Orissa Amendment) Act with regard to the stamp duty payable on such instrument.

2. The facts leading to the formulation of the aforesaid question have been depicted in the writ petition as follows:

The petitioner, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, represented through its Director carries on business of development of land and construction of apartments. For the purpose of its business, the petitioner purchased a piece of Sarad non-irrigative variety of land measuring Ac.0.927 dec. pertaining to Sabik Plot No.1807 and Sabik Khata No.507 of Mouza Gadakana under Bhubaneswar Tahasil of Khurda district correspond¬ing to Mutation Plot No.3803 and Mutation Khata No.1053/29, which further corresponds to Not Final Settlement Draft Khatiyan Plot No.1558 under Not Final Settlement Draft Khatiyan Khata No.3077, from the recorded owner by virtue of sale deed no.8927 which was registered before the District Sub-Registrar, Khurda (opposite party no.2) on 06.08.2007. The consideration money foe the land as set forth in sale deed is Rs.30.00 lakhs, which is the prevalent market value of the land in question, and the petitioner-purchas¬er paid the required stamp duties and registration fees on such value of the land. Even after the registration when the regis¬tered sale deed was not returned, on enquiry the petitioner was informed that the valuation of the land mentioned in the sale deed as well as the stamp duties and registration fees paid thereon are much less and, therefore, the petitioner was required to pay the deficit stamp duties and the registration fees after the matter of under valuation was adjudicated by the competent authority. The petitioner was also informed that only after payment of deficit stamp duties and registration fees, the origi¬nal sale deed shall be returned to the petitioner. It is further stated that the valuation set forth in the sale deed exceeds Rs.1.00 lakhs and, therefore, as per the notification dated 31.05.2002 of the State Government in the Revenue Department, the Inspector General of Registration (opposite party no.1) is compe¬tent to act as the Stamp Collector under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act and adjudicate the dispute. The petitioner, however, received notice from opposite party no.2, the District Sub-Regis¬trar, Khurda, a year after registration of the instrument calling upon the petitioner to appear before him on 18.7.2008 and to answer the claim of Rs.12,04,747/- payable towards deficit regis¬tration fees and stamp duties on the instrument in question. Having not received the original registered instrument, the petitioner is not in a position to carry on his business and also is unable to avail loans from the Banks. Finding no other way, the petitioner enquired from the office of opposite party no.1 about the pendency of undervaluation proceeding and also filed necessary objection along with some documents as well as an application for release of the original sale deed, but opposite party no.1, being in charge of a number of posts has not yet considered the objection and application of the petitioner.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that provi¬sion of Sub-section (2) of Section 61 of the Registration Act casts a statutory duty on the Registering Officer to return the original instrument immediately after completion of registration and that the mere initiation of a proceeding under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act for the purpose of adjudication of the payabili¬ty of any further stamp duty and registration fees does not entitle the Registering Authority to retain possession of the original registered instrument.

The petitioner, therefore, seeks a directi