Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30186 Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 32971 of 2022 Petitioner :- Siyaram Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramnath Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh Singh Tomer Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. 1. Heard Sri Ramnath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Siddharth Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents. 2. By means of instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 16.06.2022 passed by the Collector, Auraiya as well as the order dated 07.09.2022 passed by Commissioner, Kanpur Mandal, Kanpur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a valid licence to run the medical store, which is situated on the premises near NTPC, Bamba Phaphund road Dibiyapur, Auraiya to which on 02.11.2019, a notice was issued to the petitioner to which the reply/objection was filed by the petitioner, but not being satisfied proceedings under the provisions of Indian Stamp Act were initiated. Thereafter, impugned order dated 16.06.2022 was passed without considering the reply of the petitioner. Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 04.07.2022 Hence, this writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the shop was taken on rent and therefore, the same has been vacated, but still the proceedings have illegally been initiated against the petitioner. He further submits that the basis of initiation of proceedings are undated as to whether affidavit were initiated where no period has been fixed, but still the proceedings were initiated. 5. He next submits that on an identical sets of fact, notices were issued to the five persons, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No.7 to this writ petition, but against the three persons, proceedings were dropped and the petitioner has been singled out. He further submits that once on an identical sets of fact, the proceedings are dropped against the three persons, on the similar sets of fact, the authorities cannot arbitrarily and illegally proceed against the petitioner. 6. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel supports the impugned orders. 7. Upon hearing the parties, the Court has perused the record. 8. The record shows that the proceedings were initiated against five persons including the petitioner. 9. The perusal of the Annexure No.7 annexed to the instant writ petition shows that against the proceedings on similar circumstances under the Stamp Act started against five persons, but against three person, proceedings were dropped. The said facts were brought to the notice of the authorities below, but no weightage has been given as to why the petitioner was singled out from them. The appellate court also did not give any weightage. The said ground has been taken before this Court also, but no specific denial to the same has been made by the State in the counter affidavit. 10. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the matter requires reconsideration. 11. Accordingly, the impugned orders cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and the same are hereby quashed. 12. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remanded to the authority concerned for deciding afresh by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after hearing all the stakeholder, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 13. Any amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned orders, shall be subject to the outcome of the fresh order to be passed by the authority concerned. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Pravesh Mishra Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad