IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

202 CWP-12378-2022 (O&M)

Date of Decision:08.04.2026 Baba Farid Vidyak Society ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present:- Mr. Gagneshwar Walia, Advocate and Mr. Fateh Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Shruti, AAG, Punjab.

*****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI J.(Oral)

1. By this common judgment, the bunch of writ petitions bearing CWP Nos. 12378, 12483, 12487, 12493, 12497, 12498, 12502, 12508, 12511 and 12515 of 2022 is being disposed of with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, as the controversy involved in the aforesaid petitions is identical and the impugned orders passed by the appellate authority are the same in nature.

2. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 12378 of 2022, titled as Baba Farid Vidyak Society versus State of Punjab and others.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an educational charitable society and had purchased 10 different properties which are relevant to the present 10 cases and the sale deeds were executed vide Annexure P-5. By virtue of different notifications issued by the State Government, the educational charitable societies are exempted from payment of stamp duty, and these notifications have been attached with the present petition as Annexure P-10, under which the petitioner-society was entitled to exemption from stamp duty. However, an order was passed by the learned Collector, Bathinda, vide Annexure P-8, whereby the Collector, on the basis of an audit objection raised by the Accountant General, Punjab, observed that there was deficient stamp duty/registration fee and directed recovery of the same from the petitioner.

4. He submitted that the aforesaid order passed by the Collector, Bathinda, did not even deal with the aforesaid issue as to whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption or not in terms of the said notifications, but merely observed that recovery was to be effected from the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not been able to show how it was entitled to such exemption.

5. He further submitted that when the petitioner-society filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Faridkot, being the appellate authority, the learned appellate authority, vide order dated 25.03.2022 (Annexure P- 11), dismissed the appeal without assigning any reasons whatsoever, by passing a cryptic and non-speaking order. He also submitted that vide Annexure P-9, the petitioner had filed the appeal raising several grounds, including the ground as to how it was entitled to exemption from stamp duty in view of being a charitable educational society in terms of the notifications issued by the Government of Punjab. However, the appellate authority did not even refer to the said grounds and passed an order which is, on the face of it, a non-speaking and cryptic order. Therefore, both the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had earlier also purchased certain properties and exemption was granted to the petitioner-society, and in this regard, an order (Annexure P-12) has been attached along with the present petition.

7. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that she cannot controvert the aforesaid factual position that when the appellate authority, vide Annexure P-11, decided the appeal, the same was not backed by reasons.

8. I have heard learned counsels for the parties.

9. When the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority vide Annexure P-9, various grounds were raised, including the ground that the petitioner was entitled to exemption from stamp duty, and this aspect was specifically mentioned. However, when the appeal was decided by the appellate authority vide Annexure P-11, the same was not even discussed and the order passed by the appellate authority is a totally cryp