Hon’ble P.K.S. Baghel, J.—The petitioner has preferred this writ petition to seek issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 17.3.2001 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Second), Varanasi Region, Varanasi, and the order dated 9.2.2000 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Jaunpur, whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit the deficiency of the stamp duty to a sum of Rs. 28,700/-.

2. The basic facts pertaining to the issue in question may be stated as; a sale-deed dated 30.12.1994 was executed between Kripa Shankar and the petitioner in respect of Plot No. 956 measuring 0.113 hectare situated in Village Kacchideeh, Tehsil Machhalishahar, District Jaunpur. A proceeding under the provisions of The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, the “Act, 1899”), on the basis of a report of Deputy Registrar, Machhlishahar dated 10.3.1995, was registered under Section 47A of the said Act. A spot inspection was made by the Tehsildar, who had stated in his report that the plot in question is situated at a distance of one kilometer from the road but it is in the vicinity of residential area, for the said reason it is liable to be valued at the rate of residential area and thus, the land in question was valued at Rs. 2,43,600/-. Accordingly, deficiency of stamp duty of Rs. 28,700/- was imposed upon the petitioner. The petitioner had filed objection and stated that no spot inspection was made and land is situated 1Km. away from the road and no abadi land is near the aforesaid land. It was also stated that from the Tehsildar’s report it is also clear that the land is being used for agricultural purpose and Tehsildar has also found the crop standing over the land in question and canal is situated near the petitioner’s plot. Thus the valuation was wrongly calculated as a residential area in square feet.

3. The petitioner has also filed the document to establish that nearby plot of the petitioner being Plot No. 960Ka is also used for agricultural purposes and according to the circle rate the stamp was paid by the purchaser of the said land, a copy of the sale-deed has been brought on the record as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also filed a copy of sale-deed in respect to another adjoining Plot No. 401, on which the stamp duty treating the plot as agricultural plot, has been realised.

4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents. The stand taken in the counter-affidavit is that the land has been found to be a residential potential though it is situated 1Km. away from the road. In the counter-affidavit, a copy of the inspection report has been brought on the record as Annexure CA-1.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the stamp duty paid by him on the sale-deed was proper and the respondent No. 3 has passed the order ignoring the objection and the spot inspection report submitted by Tehsildar. He further urged that on the basis of future potential the stamp duty cannot be assessed. The petitioner is using the land for agricultural purposes, which is also evident from the report of Tehsildar.

6. Learned Standing Counsel has taken the Court to various paragraphs of the counter-affidavit and he submits that no interference is called for.

7. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

8. The Governor of the State of U.P. in exercise of powers under Section 27 of the Act, 1899 has framed the “Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997” (for Short, “Rules, 1997”). Section 27 of the Act, 1899 provides that party presenting an instrument relating to immovable property is chargeable with ad valorem duty. Section 27 reads as under;

“27. Facts affecting duty to be set forth in instrument.—(1) The consideration (if any) and all other facts and circumstances affecting the chargeability of any instrument with duty, or the amount of the duty with which it is chargeable, shall be fully and truly set forth t