Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90220 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 73219 of 2011 Petitioner :- Nisar Ahmad Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gopal Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State - respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 29.8.2011 passed by respondent no. 2 and the order dated 30.3.2010 passed by respondent no. 3, in the proceeding under Section 47 A/ 33 of the Stamp Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased an agricultural land of plot no. 469 area 0.083 hectare vide registered sale deed dated 19.12.2007 and paid the due stamp duty thereof according to prevalent circle rate. He further submits that the proceedings under Section 47 A/33 of Indian Stamp Act were initiated and a survey was conducted on 23.5.2008 in which no construction was found thereafter vide letter dated 22.1.2010, the matter was transferred from the Court of Additional Collector, Basti to the Court of Assistant Commissioner, Stamp, to which neither any notice nor any opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner and upon relying the exparte spot inspection report, the impugned order has been passed by which deficiency of stamp together with penalty and interest has been imposed against which the petitioner has preferred an appeal, which has also been dismissed without considering the material on record. He further submits that in para 10 of the writ petition, specific averments have been made that neither any notice nor any opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before passing the order dated 30.3.2010. He submits that the impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, same is liable to be quashed. He prays for allowing the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel supports the impugned order and submits that the petitioner has submitted reply to the notice and thereafter chose in his wisdom not to appear before the respondent authority, therefore, the impugned orders are justified. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the records. 6. Admittedly, the land in question has been purchased as an agricultural land and proceedings has been initiated on the basis of report dated 23.5.2008, wherein also it has been stated that no construction was raised but during pendency of the case, the matter has been transferred from the Court of Additional Collector, Basti to the Court of Assistant Commissioner, Stamp, Basti to which neither any notice nor any opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner. The record further shows that again a survey was made on 4.12.2008 to which the petitioner was not duly informed. The respondent authorities were required to make spot inspection in accordance with Rule 7 (3) (c) of UP Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules 1997 but no spot inspection was made in the presence of the petitioner. 7. The record further shows that the petitioner was never put to notice either at the time of spot inspection dated 4.12.2008 on the basis of which the impugned order has been passed, or at the time when the case was transferred to the court of Assistant Commissioner, Stamp, and the impugned order has been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justices. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter requires re- consideration by the respondent authorities. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 29.8.2011 and 30.3.2010 are set aside. The matter is remanded to competent authority, who, after considering the evidence filed by the petitioner as well as after giving due opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders, shall decide the matter, afresh, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 10. Any amount already deposited by the petitioner shall be subject to the outcome of the fresh order passed by the respondent. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Rahul Dwivedi/- Digitally signed by :- RAHUL DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad