Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—The writ petition is directed against the order of the Collector dated 7.4.2006 passed in proceedings under the (Indian) Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the revisioinal order thereto dated 27.6.2011 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority (hereinafter referred to as the CCRA).

2. The solitary question which falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether the four instruments in question are chargeable to stamp duty as transfer of lease by way of assignment under Article 63 or as a conveyance of sale under Article 23(a) or as a lease/Sub-lease under Article 35 of the Schedule 1-B of the Act.

3. Before making an attempt to answer the above question, it would be profitable to narrate in brief certain facts giving rise to the present writ petition.

4. The land of about 17 Bigha 10 Biswa situate in village Madhugarhi, District Hathras is the subject of the above four instruments. The absolute owner of the said land is one Thakur Sri Krishna Chandra Ji Maharaj who leased out the aforesaid land vide lease deed dated 14.7.2008 in favour of Lala Har Charan Das and Purshotam Das. The said lease hold rights were purchased by Smt. Shakuntala Devi in auction in Execution Case No. 14 of 1974. On the death of Smt. Shakuntala Devi, as per her Will the said lease hold rights in the said land devolved upon her heirs, who raised some constructions over it. The heirs of aforesaid Smt. Shakuntala Devi, vide four separate instruments No. 6490, 6491, 6492 and 6495 of 14/24-12-01 transferred their leasehold rights in the said land in favour of the petitioner. The said instruments were duly registered and the Sub-registrar charged stamp duty on then in accordance with Article 63 of Schedule 1-B of the Act by treating them to be transfer of lease by way of assignment.

5. Subsequently, on complaint being made by one Shyam Bihari Sharma on 9.1.2002 a report was submitted by the Sub-registrar on 22.1.2002 assessing market value of the aforesaid land as Rs. 5,34,30,000/- and deficiency in stamp duty of Rs. 1,11,70, 500/-. Accordingly, he recommended to the Assistant Commissioner, Stamp on 5.1.2002 to determine the deficiency in stamp duty on the above instruments as per the market value in accordance with the Article 35(a)(vi) of Schedule 1-B of the Act. In pursuance of the above complaint and the report, Stamp Case Nos. 61, 62, 63 and 64 of 2002 were initiated against the petitioner under Section 47-A of the Act.

6. In the proceedings a report of valuation was submitted by the Tehsildar assessing the market value of the aforesaid land as Rs. 3,48,10,000/-. A report was also submitted by the Public Works Department (PWD) on 25.6.2002 regarding the valuation of the constructions (Malva) situate over it and the land covered by the construction to be Rs. 1,59,10,036/- by applying the rate of Rs. 3,000/- per square yard.

7. The Collector, Hathras (Mahaya Nagar) decided all the four cases by a common order dated 26.8.2002 and treated the instruments to be lease deed and accordingly determined the deficiency in stamp duty on the basis of the above reports. The order of the Collector was challenged by the petitioner by means of a Stamp, Revision No. 189 of 2002-03. The revision was allowed in part by the CCRA, Allahabad vide order dated 25.3.2004 and the order of the Collector was set aside. The matter was sent back to the Collector for reconsideration in the light of the observations made in revision. In the second round, after remand a fresh inspection report was submitted on 8.7.2005. Thereafter, Collector again by a common order dated 7.4.2006 determined the deficiency in stamp duty by treating the instruments to be conveyance of sale according to Article 23(a) of Schedule 1-B of the Act and in the alternative to be lease under Article 35(a) (vi) of Schedule 1-B of the Act. The said order of the Collector was assailed by means of four separate revisions which were dismissed by the C