Allahabad High Court
RASHIDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as the petitioner must first avail the statutory appeal or revision remedy, and the appellate authority may address the notice service issue.
Summary
The petitioner challenged an order passed under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, contending that the order was ex parte and that notice had not been served. The Court held that the petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy of filing an appeal or revision, even if the order was ex parte, and that the question of notice service can be addressed by the appellate or revisional authority. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file an appeal or revision with a stay application within three weeks. The Court further directed that the appellate or revisional authority decide the stay within seven days and the appeal or revision within three weeks, and to cure any defect in notice service if found. The order thus emphasizes the primacy of statutory remedies over writ jurisdiction in such matters.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable when a statutory alternative remedy of appeal or revision is available under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
- Whether the service of notice to the petitioner is a prerequisite for the validity of the order under Section 47A.
Legislation cited
- Indian Stamp Act, 1899 — s. 47A
Subjects
- writ petition
- alternative remedy
- appeal
- revision
- stay application
- notice service
- Indian Stamp Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35682 of 2026
Rashid
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ratnesh Kumar Pandey, Ravindra Pratap
Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 36
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Ratnesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri
R.P. Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for State-Respondents.
2. Petitioner has an efficacious and statutory alternative remedy to file an
appeal or revision, as the case may be, against the order passed under
Section 47A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 even if the impugned order is passed
ex parte though in impugned order it is mentioned that notice was issued.
Therefore, a ground that whether notice was served or not can still be
considered by Appellate or Revisional Authority and a rush to this Court
without availing alternative remedy is not justified.
3. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of that in case an appeal or a
revision is filed alongwith a stay application within a period of three weeks
from today, the Appellate or Revisional Authority, as the case may be, shall
decide stay application within seven days and appeal or revision thereafter
be decided within three weeks. In case on basis of record the Authority
comes to a conclusion that no service was effected upon petitioner, it will
pass appropriate order to cure the defect in accordance with law.
September 9, 2026
AK (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…