M. S. A. SIDDIQUI ( 1 ) THE challenge in this writ petition is to the order of the Additional District Judge dated 20th March, 1987, who while accepting the appeal of the respondent, has, interalia, fixed the ratable of the property in question. ( 2 ) THE Assessing Authority fixed the ratable value of the premises at Rs. 9070. 00 with effect from 1st April, 1985 after taking the rate of the land at Rs. 225. 00 per sq. yd. and the cost of construction at Rs. 51,420. 00. Learned A. D. J. on appeal filed by the respondent estimated the cost of the land at Rs. 23,000. 00 being the amount of premium paid by the respondent and the cost of construction at Rs. 58,420. 00 as shown in the valuation report of the valuer. As regards the cost of construction, no dispute has been raised by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that the learned A. D. J. has committed grave error in fixing the rate of the land at Rs. 23,000. 00, on the basis of the amount of premium paid by the respondent. On a perusal of the assessment order dated 8. 6. 86, it appears that the Assessing Authority has declined to determine the market value of the land on respondent s failure to furnish the requisite evidence. Such an approach of the Assessing Authority has been deprecated by the Apex Court in Dr. Balbir Singh Vs. M. C. D. AIR 1985 SC 339 . Similarly in MCD Vs. N. C. Jain 45 (1991) DLT 219 (DB) a Division Bench of this Court has observed as under:- "the assessing authority should try and ascertain as to the market rate of land on the basis of sale deed, auction prices etc. near about the time when the construction began in the immediate or near vicinity of the land where it is situate, if this evidence which would be primary evidence, is not available, then reference and reliance can be placed on such circulars which are issued by various government departments". ( 3 ) THUS, the value of the land could be ascertained from the sale deeds of similarly situated comparative land of the date (s) nearest to the date of commencement of the construction in the vicinity. ( 3 ) THUS, the value of the land could be ascertained from the sale deeds of similarly situated comparative land of the date (s) nearest to the date of commencement of the construction in the vicinity. Such sale deeds would be available in the record of the office of the petitioner also as they are filed in connection with the mutation of properties in the names of transferees. That apart it was also observed in the case of MCD Vs. N. C. Jain (Supra) that :- "one of the basis for arriving at the market price of land is by invoking the principles contained in Section 24 of the Land Acquisition Act while determining the market price of land which is acquired by way of acquisition. The assessing authority should try and ascertain as to the market rate of land on the basis of sale deed, auction prices etc. near about the time when the construction begin in the immediate or near vicinity of the land where it is situate. If this evidence which would be primary evidence, is not available, then reference and reliance can be placed on such circulars which are issued by various government departments. If the said circulars are contradictory, as they appear to be in the present case, then it would be the duty of the Assessor and Collector to try and ascertain from those government departments on the basis on which the said Government departments have fixed the land rates. " ( 4 ) IN the instant case, the learned Additional District Judge instead of himself determining the rate of land ought to have set aside the order of assessment and remanded the case to the Assessing Authority with the direction to determine the market price of the land in accordance with law. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and the assessment order of the Assessing Authority are set aside. The Assessing Authority is directed to redetermine the ratable value of the property in question in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the parties to lead such evidence with regard to the rate of the land as may be available in accordance with law. No order as to costs.