Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23560 of 2021 Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajeet Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Earlier on 21.09.2021, following order was passed:-
"Heard Sri Ajeet Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel has pointed out that the order impugned dated 15.02.2021 is an appelable order under Section 56 (1) of the Stamp Act and writ petition is not maintainable.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an interim order granted by coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ-C No. 13645 of 2021 dated 06.08.2021, wherein the Court had entertained a writ petition directly against the order of the Collector without relegating the matter to the appellate authority under Section 56 (1) of the Stamp Act. Apex Court in case of Whirlpool Corporation and Ors. Vs. Registrar, Trade Marks, Mumbai and Ors. 1998 Supreme (SC) 1085 and recent decision in case of Additional Commissioner of State Tax and Ors. Vs. M/s Commercial Steel Limited (Civil Appeal No. 5121 of 2021) decided on 03.09.2021 has held that the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India only in matters where the fundamental right has been infringed or there is violation of principle of natural justice or where vires of any act is challenged.
In the present case, it appears that neither the fundamental right of the petitioner has been infringed nor any violation of principle of natural justice as petitioner has been granted opportunity to defend his case and also the vires of any act is not under challenge.
However, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is not prepared with the matter and wants some time to address the Court on the ground of alternative remedy.
Put up this matter in the additional list of cases tomorrow i.e. 22.09.2021 at 2.00 PM.
Hearing to continue."
Again, the matter was taken up on 23.09.2021, wherein a request was made on behalf of petitioner and the matter was adjourned for the day and following order was passed:-
"On 21.09.2021, the matter was adjourned on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner who was to address the Court as to the maintainability of the writ petition. Today, when the matter was taken up, a request has been made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner to adjourn the matter for the day.
Put up this matter in the additional cause list tomorrow i.e. 24.09.2021 at 2:00 P.M."
Today, when the matter was taken up, no one is present on behalf of petitioner to press the writ petition.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State states that the order impugned dated 15.02.2021 has been passed by Collector/ District Magistrate, District- Saharanpur holding deficiency of stamp under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act.
The petitioner was required to address the Court as regards the maintainability of the writ petition, but no argument has been advanced to support the contention that alternative remedy does not bar filing of the present writ petition.
As the Apex Court had already settled the law as to the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in cases where there is infringement of fundamental right, violation of principles of nature justice or vires of the Act is under challenge otherwise the statutory remedy has to be availed as provided under the Act.
In the present case, as the petitioner has failed to address the Court as to any violation of fundamental right or principles of natural justice or any vires of any Act or statute being under challenge, there is alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 56 (1-A) of the Stamp Act, writ petition is not maintainable and the same is dismissed.
However, it is provided that in case petitioner approaches the appellate authority within one month from today and files an appeal, the appellate authority shall not go into the question of limitation and shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.9.2021 V.S.Singh