PATNA HC DEALS BLOW TO REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT

PATNA HC DEALS BLOW TO REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT

8-SEP-ENG 1

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

PATNA------------------------In a significant case concerning land registration and stamp duty, the Patna High Court set aside the action taken by the Registration Department, finding it legally untenable. The Court clarified that once a document has been accepted after the deposit of prescribed stamp duty and other charges, an additional burden of stamp duty and penalties cannot be imposed on a citizen later without adhering to the procedure prescribed by law. A single bench led by Justice Rajkumar, while hearing a writ petition filed by Shashi Bhushan Singh, quashed the order dated July 14, 2015, issued by the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

Under that order, the petitioner had been charged an additional stamp duty of ₹10,13,400 and a penalty of ₹1,01,340. The matter related to the registration of a sale deed for 14 *katha*s of land in Muzaffarpur. This sale deed had been executed in compliance with a Civil Court decree. The District Sub-Registrar had determined the stamp duty and other charges based on available records and the nature of the land. The petitioner had deposited the entire determined amount. Subsequently, on December 12, 2014, the sale deed was accepted, and a receipt and token were issued. However, despite being accepted, the document was not handed over to the petitioner.

About four and a half months later, proceedings for additional stamp duty were initiated based on a report by an Upper Divisional Clerk, which characterized the land as commercial in nature. The report cited alleged commercial activity taking place in a hut situated on the land. On this basis, action regarding additional stamp duty and penalties was taken under Section 47-A of the Bihar Stamp Act. Questioning this action, the High Court observed that the District Sub-Registrar had ample opportunity to verify the actual nature and market value of the land at the time of registration itself. If necessary, a report from the concerned Circle Officer could also have been obtained. The court also observed that an Upper Divisional Clerk was not the competent public authority under the rules to determine the nature of the land. Consequently, initiating proceedings for additional stamp duty based on his report could not be considered appropriate. The High Court also emphasized the importance of the principles of natural justice. The court stated that under Section 47-A(2), it is mandatory to grant the concerned party at least one month to present their case and submit evidence. However, in this instance, a notice issued on July 6, 2015, required appearance on July 14, and the final order was passed on that very day. The court deemed this contrary to the procedure prescribed by law and the principles of natural justice.

The State Government argued before the court that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal available. However, the High Court did not accept this argument. The court held that when the mandatory procedure prescribed by law is not followed at the initial stage itself, the subsequent appellate process cannot cure that fundamental legal defect. The High Court quashed both the order dated July 14, 2015, issued by the Assistant Inspector General (Registration) and the report dated February 7, 2015. Additionally, it directed the District Sub-Registrar, Muzaffarpur, to complete the final registration of the sale deed and hand it over to the petitioner within four weeks.

This judgment by the Patna High Court sends a clear message that officials must adhere to the procedure prescribed by law in matters concerning land registration and stamp duty. Before arbitrarily imposing additional charges or penalties after a document has been accepted, it is essential to provide the concerned party with an adequate opportunity as mandated by law.