JUDGMENT 1. - In this public interest litigation, the learned counsel for petitioner, Shri Ajeet Bhandari, has challenged the issuance of the Circulars Annexures 1, 2 and 3 dated 24.4.90, 30.5.90 and 20.8.90 respectively issued by the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Rajasthan, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "the I.G., R.&S."), whereby directions have been issued that while assessing the market value of the properties which are sought to be registered due regard should be given to these circulars. Respondent No. 2, Inspector General, Registration & Stamps Deptt., Ajmer issued a phonogram to all the Registering Authorities in Rajasthan on 22.4.1990 whereby he directed that registration of the documents should be done only after considering the market value of the property 20% more than it had been valued in the previous year. The language used is as under:- " xr o"kZ ftl vf/kdre cktkj Hkko ij iath;u fd;k x;k Fkk mlesa de ls de 20 izfr'kr dh o`f) djds gh Hkfo"; esa iath;u fd;k tkosA " After this phonogram, the confirmation copy was sent it was mentioned therein that the aforesaid directions must be observed forthwith in letter and spirit and in case leniency is shown in its observation disciplinary proceedings shall be initiated against the concerned officers. In another circular dated 30.5.90 I.G., R.&S. clarified the increase by 20% as under:- "20% increase is in general terms however, on National Highways if the property is situated, market value may be assessed by 50% more the market value of the premises on other roads other than National Highways may be increased by 30% to 35%; for the rest 20% as already stated". However, it was cleared that 20% additional increase is a must. In the third circular it was mentioned that 5% increase in respect of market value in rural areas and 10% increase in market value in Urban areas should be considered for registration of the documents with effect from 1.9.1990. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid circulars is that I.G. R.&S. has no jurisdiction express or implied to issue such circulars which fetters the discretion of the Registering Authority who has to calculate the market value of the property in accordance with the provisions of law. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid circulars is that I.G. R.&S. has no jurisdiction express or implied to issue such circulars which fetters the discretion of the Registering Authority who has to calculate the market value of the property in accordance with the provisions of law. It is submitted that infact there is no post like that of I.G., R.&S. and it is not within his domain to issue any circular in respect of valuation of the property for the purpose of registration. Learned counsel submits that there is a procedure laid down under law, in cases, when instruments which are tendered for registration shows under-valuation of the properties, provisions of Section 47A of the Indian Stamps Act, 1899, (As adapted by the State of Rajasthan) takes care of such situations. It is submitted that the circular dated 22.4.90 issued is absolutely arbitrary and unreasonable as it provides that instrument should be registered after increasing the market value by percentages mentioned in various circulars. It is submitted that the market value of the property in respect of different properties is different. It depends upon several factors such as the location of the properties whether same is free from all encumbrances or not, whether the seller hands over the vacant possession or not whether the property is situated in commercial area, and also the proximity regarding location of the premises qua general development of the area. It is submitted that the market.value varies according to the topography also. There may also be places where the market value of the property have gone down. In certain circumstances when communal incidents take place it puts a fear complexion in the mind of the inhabitants of that particular area and market value goes down. 3. It is then submitted that the Deputy Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Finance, issued an order, dated 24th July, 1985, whereunder directions were issued for constitution of District level Committees, for assessing the market value oi the properties in the areas and issuing guide lines. These committees were consisting of Collector of the District and M. L. A., Pradhan of Panchayat Samiti, Addl. District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Officer, Secretary U.I.T. and where there are no U.I.Ts. a representative of the Municipal Board, Executive Engineer (PWD) concerned, Asstt. Inspector General of Registration and Stamps and the concerned Sub-Registrar. These committees were consisting of Collector of the District and M. L. A., Pradhan of Panchayat Samiti, Addl. District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Officer, Secretary U.I.T. and where there are no U.I.Ts. a representative of the Municipal Board, Executive Engineer (PWD) concerned, Asstt. Inspector General of Registration and Stamps and the concerned Sub-Registrar. Sub-Registrar was appointed as a Secretary of this Committee which was changed by amending the notification on 4.6.87 where District Registrar was made the member-Secretary of the Committee. It was incumbent upon the Committee to hold periodical meetings atleast once in two years to reassess the market value. However, provision was kept that in case abnormal increase in the market value special meeting could be convened for the purposes. It is therefore, submitted that Inspector General of the Registration and Stamps had issued circular without any authority of law and rather in defiance of the circular issued by the Government from time to time. It is submitted that the only purpose for increasing the market value by the circulars issued by Inspector General of Registration and Stamps was to augment the revenue of the State, which has no nexus with the valuation of the property. 4. Learned Addl. Advocate General Mr. M.I. Khan vehemently opposed the writ petition and submitted that circulars are being issued by Inspector General of Registration and Stamps in exercise of his supervisory power by invoking provisions of Section 49A with an aim to regulate the assessment of market value correctly. It is submitted that circulars are only the guidelines and do not have a binding character. It is then submitted that no registering authority so far has refused to register the documents by compelling anyone to affix stamps as per assessment made by the registering authority in pursuance of impugned circulars. It is submitted that they are only for the purpose to make proper demand of the stamp duty otherwise the cases are liable to be referred under Section 47A of the Indian Stamps Act and to the Collector Stamps. The submission of the learned Addl. Advocate General is that the instructions have been issued in exercise of powers conferred upon I.G., R.&S. under Section 69 of the Registration Act. The submission of the learned Addl. Advocate General is that the instructions have been issued in exercise of powers conferred upon I.G., R.&S. under Section 69 of the Registration Act. It is submitted that the Inspector General has power of superintendence under this section and it is open to him to regulate the functioning of the Registrars and the Sub-Registrars and further to issue circulars concerning the inquiry into the correctness of the valuation of the instrument, for presentation. It is further submitted that it was essential also because under Section 54 of the Registration Act it is essential to keep the current index. It reads as under:- "S. 54. Current indexes and entries therein-In every office in which any of the books hereinbefore mentioned are kept, there shall be prepared current indexes of the contents of such books; and every entry in such indexes shall be made, so far as practicable, immediately after the registering officer has copied, or filed a memorandum of, the document to which it relates." It is then submitted that the circulars neither suffer from any infirmity nor they are justiceable, they are for personal consumption of the registering authorities and to keep the index of market value up-to-date so that the escape of estate duty or the evasion of it can be timely detected. 5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions and perused the various provisions of law. 6. Before I proceed further to examine other points I deem it proper to examine as to whether the Inspector General of Registration & Stamps has ipso facto any powers under the Indian Stamps Act, 1899 as adopted by Rajasthan by Act 7 of 52). There are only two authorities mentioned for purposes of carrying out the object of the entire Act, one is the Collector and the another is Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. Collector has been defined as under:- "Collector includes any officer whom the State Government may by notification in the official gazette, appoints in this behalf". Wherever the question of valuation of the property or the question of determination of the duty or following the procedure for examination and impounding an instrument etc. are the powers have been vested in the Collector. The Collector under this Act has very wide powers exercise able by the Collector are only subject to the control of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. are the powers have been vested in the Collector. The Collector under this Act has very wide powers exercise able by the Collector are only subject to the control of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. Powers of the Collector have been given under the Rajasthan General Clauses Act. 1955 which defines the term 'Collector'. In reference to the provisions of Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act, 1952 the powers of the 'Collector' are now well defined and can be summarised as under:- (i) The Collector has the power to examine the instrument for the purpose of determining the true nature of an instrument in dispute and then to determine the amount of stamp duty and penalty in accordance with the law, and the Collector may for that purpose issue notices, record evidence on oath and decide the point in accordance with the law (S. 31). (ii) To impound unstamped or an insufficiently stamped instruments (S. 33). (iii) To examine an instrument to determine the sufficiency or otherwise of the nature of the instrument liable to stamp duty-(S. 3 & 34). (iv) Where instruments are unstamped or insufficiently stamped, to recover stamp duty. (v) And to impose penalty in accordance with Section 35 and recover the same (S. 35 & 36). (vi) Issue certificates by putting an endorsement that the instrument in question is already sufficiently stamped or deficient stamp duty with or without penalty have been paid and recovered (Ss. 35, 40 & 41). (vii) To forego penalty but to recover stamp duty or penalty recovered in excess of the legal amount. (vii) To forego penalty but to recover stamp duty upon unduly stamped instruments by accident (S. 41). (viii) Refund of such amount of stamp duty or penalty recovered in excess of the legal amount in certain cases (S. 38 (1) & 44). (ix) Prosecution of those persons who evade stamp duty or for offence under the stamp laws (S. 43). (x) Power to refund- (a) the amount of value of spoiled stamps (S. 49). (b) the amount of value of missed stamps (S. 52). (c) the amount of value of stamp not required for use (S. 54). (xi) To function as a court under the stamp laws. (xii) To hear the disputes referred to the Collector and pass an appropriate order thereupon in accordance with the law. (b) the amount of value of missed stamps (S. 52). (c) the amount of value of stamp not required for use (S. 54). (xi) To function as a court under the stamp laws. (xii) To hear the disputes referred to the Collector and pass an appropriate order thereupon in accordance with the law. (xiii) To refer the cases to the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer for an appropriate direction and decision. (xiv) As executive head of the district and to enforce stamp law the Collector have further powers-viz (a) To appoint, remove the stamp vendors. (b) To control the sale, and supply of stamps in the District. (c) To take the notice of evasion of stamp duty by himself and call for the parties to appear in person and also call for to produce the specified instrument for determination. (d) To grant rewards" The matter came in consideration before a Full Bench of this Court consisting of Hon'ble K.N. Wanchoo C.J., K.L. Bapna and D.M. Bhandari JJ. in Hanuman Prasad v. The State of Rajasthan, AIR 1958 Raj. 291 wherein it was held that the power to demand proper duty and penalty is conferred upon the Collector by Section 40(1) (b) of the Stamps Act. It was however, observed that the aforesaid section is applicable when the Collector impounds any instrument under Section 33 or receives any instrument sent to him under Section 38 sub-section (2). The Court elaborately dealt with the question as to who has the power to determine proper duty and held that the power to determine proper duty and penalty is conferred upon the Collector by Section 40(1)(b). That section, however, is applicable when the Collector impounds any instrument under Section 33, or receives any instrument sent to him under Section 38 sub-section (2). So far as the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority as mentioned under the Indian Stamps Act the definition can be had from general definitions given under Section 32 of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act wherein Chief Controlling Revenue Authority or Chief Revenue Authority shall mean to be the Board of Revenue. Thus, the Board of Revenue is an authority which has the controlling powers in respect of Indian Stamps Act as is clearly borne out from the provisions of Sections 56 and 57 of the Stamps Act. Thus, the Board of Revenue is an authority which has the controlling powers in respect of Indian Stamps Act as is clearly borne out from the provisions of Sections 56 and 57 of the Stamps Act. Even as per Section 76A of the Stamps Act the State Government has by notification delegated powers under various sections to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and these powers include the controlling powers as the name suggests. Otherwise also perusal of Section 56 makes it clear that powers exercise able by the Collector are subject to the control of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. I am unable to lay my hands on any of the provisions under Indian Stamps Act or Rajasthan Stamps Rules where there is any authority in law designated as Inspector General of Registration and Stamps who might have been assigned any powers under the provisions of this Act. Learned Addl. Advocate General also could not point out any provision except that under the Rajasthan Stamps Disposal Rules, 1962, Superintendent of Stamps means Addl. Inspector General of Registration and Stamps. Superintendent of Stamps is a terminology which also finds place in the Rajasthan Stamps Rules, though not defined under the Act. Superintendent of Stamps for the purposes of Rajasthan Stamp Rules means the Superintendent of Stamps for Rajasthan and includes any other officer appointed by the Government to perform the function of Superintendent of Stamps for the purpose of the Act and the Rules, in view of tins the very nomenclature of Inspector General of Registration and Stamps appears to be not erroneous. 7. Coming to the powers of Inspector General of Registration, I have no hesitation in accepting what the Addl. Advocate General has submitted. Under Section 69 of Indian Registration Act Inspector General of Registration has powers to exercise general superintendence over all the Registration Officers in Rajasthan and not only that he also has the powers to make rules from time to time which are consistent with the provisions of the Act. Under the provisions of Section 69 he has power of regulating the exercise of the discretion reposed in the registering officers as well as in generally regulating the proceedings of the Registrars and the Sub-Registrars. Under the provisions of Section 69 he has power of regulating the exercise of the discretion reposed in the registering officers as well as in generally regulating the proceedings of the Registrars and the Sub-Registrars. However, this alone is not what is to be looked into while looking into the circulars issued, the power of regulation given to the Inspector General of the Registration are to carry out the objects of the Registration Act and not the one under the Stamps Act. In the instant case while issuing the circulars he had been exercising his powers under the provisions of the Stamps Act also, as is borne out from the language. The State of Rajasthan had been very careful in issuing the circulars from time to time and not only that in also appointing District level Committee for the purpose of fixing the market value in the particular districts. Schedule 'A' which has been placed on record clearly goes to show that such committees have to function and fix up the market value and not only that it has to act and has lo act at regular intervals for fixing valuation once in two years. The powers given to this committee could not be usruped by so-called Inspector General of Registration and Stamps (as the authority calls itself by issuing the circulars). 8. It is again a matter of common knowledge that the value of the property is guided by several factors. It varies from town to town, village to village and city to city, not only that even from locality to locality where the property is situated. It would also matter if the property is not for use of the purchaser and some tenant is living in the premises. Similarly if the property is encumbered it will not fetch the price equal to an unencumbered one, therefore, to say that 20% increase in the price should be calculated, while taxing the stamps is absolutely arbitrary and unreasonable. The circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps and putting a footnote that if any authority would permit the registration of the document without calculating the market value by increase 20% will be liable to the disciplinary action, do fetter the discretion of the authority. The circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps and putting a footnote that if any authority would permit the registration of the document without calculating the market value by increase 20% will be liable to the disciplinary action, do fetter the discretion of the authority. The legislature while enacting the law has provided ample safeguard in respect of undervalued instruments and documents and the same can be regulated but not controlled by the authorities. The type of circular issued and the language used do not indicate that they had been issued to regulate and give proper guidelines to the concerned authorities but gives an authoritative direction to the officers to follow the same in letter and spirit and to augment the revenue of the State by doing so. Such an action is clearly arbitrary, unreasonable and malafide exercise of power and cannot be sustained in law. Moreso, it is repugnant to the circular issued by the Government of Rajasthan by which the District level Committees for fixing the market values, have been formed. 9. In this view of the matter I would quash the three circulars issued by the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps. These circulars shall be ineffective and would be withdrawn forthwith. The Inspector General of Registration and Stamps shall take necessary steps to withdraw the same within a period of one month. There will be no order as to costs.Petition Allowed. *******