(1.) By consent, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal.
(2.) The petitioners would state that they purchased wet lands in RS.No.502/1 (Old No.92) and R.S.Nos.498 and 501/2 (Old No.94 and 92) respectively of Pattamangalam Village, Mayiladuthurai Town, Ward No.4, Block No.11 measuring 334.44 sq.mtr. and 441.81 sq.mtr, vide registered Doc.Nos.558 and 559 of 2014 respectively registered at the Joint I Sub Registrar, Mayiladuthurai, Nagapattinam District. The petitioners would further state that the first respondent is having powers to make a reference under Section 47A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act in the event of undervaluation and though the first respondent withheld the said documents without making a reference after a lapse of nearly one year, issued a notice dated 28.11.2013, calling upon the petitioners to remit the deficit stamp duty of Rs.61,235/- and Rs.81,115/- and registration fee of Rs.9,005/- and 11,975/- respectively towards Doc.Nos.558 and 559 of 2014, for which the petitioners had sent a reply dated 04.05.2015 to the respondents 1 and 2 seeking to return the registered documents and since it was not done, the petitioner filed W.P.No.509 of 2016, wherein this Court has passed certain directions for release of the documents and despite that the first respondent did not do so. However, the second respondent, vide impugned communication dated 04.03.2016 has called upon the petitioners to remit the deficit stamp duty of Rs.61,200/- and Rs.81,096/- respectively and also indicated that if the petitioners are aggrieved, they shall file an appeal before the fourth respondent. Challenging the legality of the said orders, the petitioners came forward with these writ petitions.
(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the impugned orders are per se unsustainable for the reason that before adjudicating the issue, the petitioners have not been put on notice and no reason whatsoever has been assigned and prays for interference.