BIPINKUMAR HIRALAL PATEL Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Learned A.G.P. Mr.Dipen Desai waives service for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the order dated 15.05.2006 of Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation Organization, Sector-2, Surat whereby, the so-called appeal of the petitioner was rejected only on the ground of delay. There is no dispute about the fact that after service of notice under the Rules, the order dated 31.12.2001 under the provisions of Section 32-A of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 (for short, "the Act") was made fixing the market value of the property in question and determining the stamp duty payable thereon. The petitioner had sought to make an application for reference under the provisions of Section 32-B of the Act and made an application for reducing the amount required to be deposited under that provision. That application of the petitioner was allowed by the order dated 27.11.2002 and necessary amount, under that order, was deposited by the petitioner on 02.12.2002. Thereafter, the so-called Appeal No.85 of 2003 was preferred on or around 18.12.2002 which had come to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 15.05.2006.

(3.) It was fairly conceded by learned A.G.P., appearing for the respondents, that after acceptance of the deposit for the purpose of making reference, the reference was required to be made and it was required to be considered and decided on merits by the appropriate authority, in accordance with law and in view of the recent judgments of this Court.