1 2025:CGHC:48697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5053 of 2025 1 - Ms Shri Baba Baidnath Ispat Pvt Ltd. Unit 2, Registered Add- 5th Floor Currency Tower, G.E. Vip Road, Telibandha Raipur, District- Raipur C.G., Through The Director, Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Agrawal Age About 57 Years, R/o Villa No. 31, Maruti Life Style Kota, Raipur, Ravi Shankar University Bindrawangarah Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Industries, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Director, Directorate, Department Of Industries, Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No. 01, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - The District Registrar, District- Raipur C.G. 4 - The Sub-Registrar Office- Kharora, Tahsil-Kharora, District- Raipur C.G. 5 - General Manager District Trade And Industry Center Raipur And Ex-Officio General Manager C.S.I.D.C. Limited Raipur, District- Raipur C.G. 6 - Inspector General Of Registration And Commissioner Of Stamps, Second Floor, Commercial Tax (Registration) Department, G S T Bhawan, North Block, Sector- 19, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajit Singh, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 23/09/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition on the following reliefs: “10.1. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly call for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ thereby commanding the respondents to refund the registration fee to the tune of Rs. 12,28,600/- deposited by the petitioner company at the time of execution/registration of lease deed on 21.07.2025 along with interest @ 12% p.a. 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s) under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking direction to the respondents to refund the registration fee of Rs. 12,28,600/- which has been charged while execution of the registered lease deed dated 3 21.07.2025 between the Governor of the Chhattisgarh through the Executive Director C.G. State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (CSIDCL), Raipur and the petitioner company for the purposes of establishment of Mineral Private Limited company of land bearing Khasra No. 25/3, 60/1 and 60/8, rakba 11.813 hectares, situated at Patwari Halka No. 00034, Village Gaitara, Tahsil Kharora, District- Raipur (C.G.) for construction of “M/s Shri Baba Baidnath Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Unit 2” in terms of the ‘exemption from the payment of stamp fee’ issued by Respondent authority as well the provisions contained in the gazette notification dated 04.02.2022. Collection of the same for registration of lease deed is bad, illegal and arbitrary in as much as the fact that the Petitioner company has been exempted from payment of stamp duty in respect of the lease land vide exemption certificate dated 09.07.2025 issued by the Respondent authority and the same is contrary to the provisions of Article II of the table of Registration fees as framed under the Registration fees as framed under the Registration Act, 1908 as the leased lands which are since exempted from payment of stamp duty therefore a registration fee of Rs. 1000/- is payable for lease deed whereas the Respondent authorities had charged Rs. 12,29,600/- as registration fee for lease deed. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and contended that respondent authority has rightly charged the registration fees however, he has admitted 4 that on 04.02.2022 the State of C.G. has issued a gazette notification with regard to terms and conditions for establishment of industries. 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Gazette notification dated 04.02.2022 specifically provides that iêksa ds jftLVªhdj.k ds fy;s& iês ij ns; eqnzkad Qhl ds ewy; dk rhu pkSFkkbZ] bl ‘krZ ds lkFk fd U;wure ¼:- 50½ gksxkA 1000 :i;s U;wure ds v/khu jgrs gq, iV~Vs ij ns; LVkEi ‘qYd ds ewY; dk rhu pkSFkkbZ ;fn iV~Vs ij eqnzkad Qhl dh NwV gks] rks QhlA 1000. Vhi% bl vuqPNsn esa iz;wDr ‘kCn **iêk** esa iêk ;k dcwfy;r] tks iês dk izfr:i u gks lfEefyr gSA 6. The petitioner’s case falls under the category of Article II of the Gazette Notification issued by the Government of C.G. dated 04.02.2022. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondents have charged the registration fees of Rs. 12,29,600/- for lease deed. 7. The similar issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in WPC No. 2205 of 2011 wherein this Court vide its order dated 05.09.2024 held in para 23 and 24 as under: “23. The impugned notice dated 17/18.08.2010 (Annexure P/1) with respect to the demand of registration fee for 5 registration of the lease deed dated 14.07.2010 for 207.465 hectares of land is upheld and with respect to the demand of registration fee for registration of the lease deed dated 14.05.2010 for 173.777 hectares of land is quashed. The petitioner is entitled for refund of the amount of registration fee deposited for the lease deed dated 14.05.2010, which was with respect to the land of 173.777 hectares of land along with the interest @ 6% per annum from the date of its deposition till its payment. 24. With the aforesaid observation and conclusion, the present petition is allowed in part. No order as to cost.” 8. The aforesaid order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in WPC No. 2205 of 2011 was upheld by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 17.01.2025 in W.A. No. 870 of 2024. 9. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the counsels for the respective parties, the above mentioned judgments of this Court, it is crystal clear that the petitioner has already been exempted from payment of registration fees under the Industrial Policy (Annexure P/4). 6 Therefore, the petitioner is only required to pay registration fees on the lease deed executed on 21.07.2025 between the Governor of the C.G. through Executive Director, CSIDCL, Raipur and the petitioner company for the purposes of establishment of Mineral Private Limited company. 10.From the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for refund of the registration fee of Rs. 12,28,600/- deposited with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of its deposition till its payment. 11.With the aforesaid observation and conclusion, the present petition is allowed. No order as to cost. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima