CHANDAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to a notification dated 21st of July 2015 whereby a proviso was added to sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Bihar Stamp Rules, 1954 which reads as under:

(3.) The argument of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioners is that such proviso is contrary to Sec. 10-A of the Indian Stamp Act as the Collector in terms of Sec. 10-A of the Act may permit duty to be paid in cash and authorize the Treasury or Sub-Treasury Officer to certify the amount of duty so paid in cash and make endorsement but such power can be exercised if there is temporary shortage of stamp in the district. Therefore, the proviso so inserted permitting payment through debit card, credit card, net banking is contrary to mandate of Section 10-A of the Act.