Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23768 Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36056 of 2023 Petitioner :- Late Shri Girja Singh Sewa Samiti Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anshu Chaudhary,Shalini Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard Shri Anshu Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned ACSC for the State - respondents. The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 12.09.2023 passed by the Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi as well as the impugned order dated 09.11.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Jalaun. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and engaged in moral purpose and running an institution in the name of S.K. Mahavidyalaya Amguha, Jalaun for imparting education to the students of rural areas. He further submits that the land in question was donated vide registered donation deed dated 18.06.2019 by Roman Kaitholik Diocese of Jhansi after paying due stamp duty. He further submits that on a complaint, the Assistant Registrar, Jalaun submitted a report dated 14.08.2020 stating therein deficiency of stamp duty, pursuant to which proceedings under section 47-A(3) of the Indian Stamp Act were initiated against the petitioner. He further submits that on 17.10.2019, a report was submitted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate stating therein the stamp duty to be sufficient. Thereafter, the District Magistrate, on the basis of the report, passed the order dated 04.11.2020 imposing deficiency of stamp duty on the instrument in question on the premise that Dr. C.P. Singh, the husband of the Manager of the Society (Smt. Raj Kumari Devi) purchased some portion of the land adjacent to the land in dispute. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 09.11.2022. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 12.09.2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the land has been donated by Roman Kaitholk Diocese of Jhansi to the petitioner and not to the Manager (Smt. Raj Kumari Devi). He further submits that the land adjacent to the petitioner's donated land, some part was purchased by the husband of the Manager of the petitioner, which cannot be said to be a same person and therefore, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner are vitiated and are liable to be quashed. Per contra, learned ACSC supports the impugned orders and submits that Dr. C.P. Singh, the husband of the Manager of the Society, i.e., Smt. Raj Kumari Devi, had purchased the land adjacent to the land in question and therefore, being husband & wife, the proceedings have rightly been initiated in view of the Government Order dated 17.08.2006. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. The sole basis for initiation of the proceedings against the petitioner is the Government Order dated 17.08.2006; wherein, it is provided that if the same person, who purchased the land adjacent to the road in small portion and after certain period, a big chunk of land is purchased, then the rate adjacent to the road land will be applicable. The Government Order is very clear, which provides that if the same person has purchased a small portion of land adjacent to the road and later on purchased big chunk of land, then the rate of adjacent land to road will be applicable. In the case in hand, the husband of the Manager of the petitioner has purchased the land adjacent to the road, but later on, the petitioner got the land in dispute by donation through its Manager, Smt. Raj Kumari. Merely the Manager of the Society, namely, Smt. Raj Kumari, managing the affairs of the petitioner as Manager cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be the one person as provided in the Government Order dated 17.08.2006. The petitioner is, undisputedly, a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, which is different juristic person. Therefore, the basis for initiation of proceedings as contemplated in the Government Order dated 17.08.2006 cannot be applicable in the facts & circumstances of the present case. In view of the aforesaid facts & circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 12.09.2023 passed by the Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi as well as the impugned order dated 09.11.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Jalaun cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The same are hereby quashed. The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Amit Mishra Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad