JUDGMENT : 

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned orders dated 12.02.2015 (Annexure P-1) and 04.03.2016 (Annexure P-3), passed by respondents No.2 and 3, whereby the petitioner has been directed to make good the deficiency in stamp duty amounting to Rs.4,50,000/- on the land purchased by it.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Market Committee which is formed under the provisions of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 and it is an autonomous body and is controlled by the Government, and therefore the prayer in the petition is for seeking exemption from stamp duty. In this regard, he submits that the Government had issued notifications dated 12.09.2013 and 18.05.2016, which have been attached along with the reply filed by the respondent-State, whereby stamp duty in favour of Government departments has been exempted. He also refers to the provisions of Section 3(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as applicable to the State of Punjab (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), and submits that by virtue of the proviso to the aforesaid provision, no duty shall be chargeable in respect of any instrument executed by, or on behalf of, or in favour of the Government in cases where, but for this exemption, the Government would be liable to pay the duty chargeable in respect of such instrument. He further submits that since the Market Committee is under the active control of the Government and is a creation of the statute, any land purchased by the petitioner would be exempted from stamp duty.

3. He further submits that the land which was purchased by the petitioner measuring 20 marlas was registered by way of Vasika No.4 on 01.04.2013 and is situated in Urban Estate, Shri Muktsar Sahib, and because of the aforesaid reasons, the exemption from payment of stamp duty may be granted and the impugned orders, by which directions have been issued to the petitioner to deposit the deficient stamp duty are liable to be quashed.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, while referring to the reply filed by the respondent-State, submits that the aforesaid exemption sought by the petitioner is not permissible in view of the fact that the petitioner, which is a Market Committee, cannot be termed as the Government because, as per the proviso to Section 3(1) of the Act, as applicable to the State of Punjab, the same applies only to the Government and not to any other body which may be a creation of the statute. In this regard, he refers to a judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.6735-2021 titled as Municipal Council, Zirakpur through its Executive Officer vs. State of Punjab and others, decided on 09.09.2025, and submits that although the aforesaid case pertains to a Municipal Council, the ratio and the principle of law remain the same because in that case also the Municipal Council was created under the statute, and in the present case also the petitioner is a Market Committee created under the statute, but in both cases such bodies cannot be termed as the Government, and the exemption can be granted only to the Government.

5. He further submits that even otherwise, in the present case, the two notifications referred to by learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable in view of the fact that admittedly the land measuring 20 marlas was purchased by the petitioner on 01.04.2013 and the notifications dated 12.09.2013 as well as 18.05.2016, although pertaining to exemption in favour of the Government, were issued after the execution of the sale deed and, therefore, cannot be applied retrospectively. He further submits that even otherwise, the aforesaid notifications do not grant any exemption to a Market Committee, but only to the Government, and therefore no benefit of the same can be extended to the petitioner.

6. I have heard lea