KIRTIKUMAR INDRAVADAN SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner a Stamp vendor, having licences bearing licence Nos. SB/376/1998 and 377 of 1998 for sale of Non-Judicial Stamp Papers, Revenue Stamps, Share Transfer Stamps, Agreement Stamps, Hundi Stamps, Court Fee Stamp Papers, Court Fee labels under the provisions of Gujarat Stamp Supply and Sales Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rule" for brevity) is before this Court.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he was issued aforesaid licences vide order dated 9-9-1998 by the respondent No. 3 i.e. Collector and Additional Superintendent of Stamps, Gujarat State. The petitioner was holding the licence for all these years and there was no complaint for his conduct during these years. On 27-7-2005 an incident is alleged to have occurred. The case of the petitioner is that on 27-5-2005, a customer came to him and asked for a stamp paper of Rs. 20/-. It is the case of the petitioner that at that time, he was taking lunch, and therefore, he requested the person to wait for some time. The person again approached the petitioner after 15 to 20 minutes and asked to give him the stamp paper. At that time, the petitioner was making entries of stamp papers sold to some other person, and therefore, he told the person to wait for a while, telling him that "I am giving you stamp paper after recording the same in the register". The person concerned in exceptional hurry, told the petitioner that as he has to reach the office, he should be given stamp paper immediately. The petitioner replied to him that he should not make such exceptional hurry as he has to supply the stamp papers after making necessary entries. He also told that if the petitioner will make the entries in hot hurry, he is likely to commit mistakes. He told him that if there was such an urgency, he could have purchased the stamp paper on a previous day.

(3.) At this juncture, the person concerned disclosed his identity as an officer from the office of the Superintendent of Stamps. He showed his identity card to the petitioner. On demand, by the officer, the petitioner tendered his register and the stock to him.