JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.N. Srivastava, J.—By way of this writ petition, petitioners are challenging order dated 21st October, 2000, passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, U.P. at Allahabad and the order dated 17.6.1996, passed by the Additional Collector/Additional District Magistrate (Protocol), Varanasi imposing an additional stamp duty of Rs. 18,342-50 and the penalty of Rs. 36,685/-. 2. The facts borne out from the record makes it clear that petitioners, who are real brothers, purchased Plot No. 630, area .24 decimal situated in Village Karnadadi, Pargana Kaswar, Tehsil & District Varanasi. A report was submitted by the Sub Registrar, Gangapur, that the share of both the transferees will come to 0.12 acre each and, therefore, valuation of the land under the sale deed should be assessed treating it non-agricultural land. On the said report, notice was issued to petitioners, who filed their objection pleading therein that the land was purchased for agricultural purposes, assessment was made on market value and stamp duty was paid accordingly. It was further pleaded that both the transferees are real brothers and members of one family and imposition of additional stamp duty treating them separately is highly arbitrary and unwarranted. The Additional Collector, by the impugned order, presuming the petitioners’ land as non-agricultural imposed an additional stamp duty of Rs. 18,342-50 and the penalty of Rs. 36,685/-. Revision preferred by the petitioners was also dismissed. 3. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel and carefully gone through the materials on record. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners urged that the impugned order suffers from error of law in assessing the land in dispute as non-agricultural land and imposition of additional stamp duty as well as penalty are against the provisions of Indian Stamp Act and the Rules framed thereunder. He further urged that presumption drawn by the authorities below is unsustainable in law and the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. 5. Sri Bhola Nath Yadav, learned Standing Counsel, while relying upon Supplementary Counter-affidavit filed by the State, urged that the Collector in exercise of power under Rule 340-A of the Indian Stamp Rules has already fixed Circle Rate and laid down that in case area of the land purchased is less than 0.16 Acre then the land shall be treated as non-agricultural land and the stamp duty shall be calculated for such land treating it as non-agricultural land. He referred Annexure-1 to the Supplementary Counter-affidavit. 6. After carefully considering the materials on record, arguments of learned Counsel for the parties and relevant provisions, this Court is of the view that the findings recorded by the authorities below suffer from error of law apparent on the face of record. The writ petition deserves to be allowed on the ground that according to the order passed by the Collector under Rule 340-A of Stamp Rules, if area of the land purchased is less than 0.16 Acre said transfer is presumed as non-agricultural and stamp duty is accordingly charged. In the present case the land covered under the sale deed is 0.24 Acre and, therefore, under the order of the Collector, the land purchased through the impugned sale deed could not be presumed as non-agricultural land. Transferees are real brothers, who purchased 0.24 Acre land in a village for agricultural purposes is also clear from the sale deed and other materials available on record. The authorities below acted illegally in presuming the land covered under the sale deed as non-agricultural land and assessing as such accordingly on the basis of such presumption. 7. In view of above, impugned orders imposing additional stamp duty and penalty was unwarranted and unsustainable in law. Impugned orders are liable to be quashed on this ground alone. The petitioners are entitled to get refund of the amount deposited under the interim orders of this Court alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum. 8. Learned Counsel for the petitioners urged that no such presumption could be drawn presuming an agricultural land as non-agricultural and the Collector acted illegally in determining the valuation of an agricultural land of less than 0.16 Acre under the provisions of Indian Stamp Act or the U.P. Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 and as such the Collector is wholly incompetent to fix such limit for valuation of an agricultural land as non-agricultural under the relevant provision. 9. In rejoinder learned Standing Counsel urged that the order passed by the Collector presuming transfer of less than 0.16 Acre agricultural land as non-agricultural in view of the fact that land less than 0.16 Acre cannot be used for agricultural purposes and such presumption drawn by the Collector while fixing principles for valuation of any agricultural land was rightly made in accordance with law. 10. 10. Considered rival submissions of learned Counsel for the parties on this aspect also. 11. Rule 3(1)(a)(i) of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 is very relevant for the purposes of assessing valuation of the land, same is being reproduced below for ready reference : “(1) In case of land— (a) included in the holding a tenure holder as defined in the law relating to land tenures : (i) the Khasra number and area of each plot forming part of the subject-matter of the instrument. (ii) Whether irrigated or unirrigated—the source of irrigation. (iii) if under cultivation—whether dofasali or otherwise. (iv) Land revenue or rent, whether exempted or not, and (v) classification of soil supported in case of instruments exceeding twenty thousand rupees in value by the certified copies or extracts from the relevant revenue records issued in accordance with law. (vi) location, (whether lies in an urban area, semi-urban area or country side), and (vii) minimum value fixed by the Collector of the district.” 12. Similarly Rule 5(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 is very relevant for the purposes of calculating valuation of agricultural land. The principle for calculation of valuation is given in this Rule. Rule 5(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 is being reproduced below : “(a) In case of land Minimum value Whether agricultural or Area of land multiplied by minimum value non-agricultural fixed by Collector of the district under Rule 4. x x x x x x" 13. There is nothing the of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 that the Collector may presume transfer of an agricultural land less than 0.16 Acre as non-agricultural even if the land is being used for the agricultural purposes. For assessing valuation he has to consider all relevant factors mentioned under Rule 3(1)(a)(i) of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 so far as agricultural land is concerned. In the present case, the total area which was purchased by the petitioners is .24 Acre which is fully cultivable and could be used for agricultural purposes. The presumption drawn by the Collector and fixation of valuation presuming it non-agricultural is wholly unwarranted in law. In the present case, the total area which was purchased by the petitioners is .24 Acre which is fully cultivable and could be used for agricultural purposes. The presumption drawn by the Collector and fixation of valuation presuming it non-agricultural is wholly unwarranted in law. Every valuation has to be calculated according to the principles laid down under Rules 3 and 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 framed under the Indian Stamp Act. 14. In view of discussions made above, writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Impugned order dated 17.6.1996, passed by the Additional Collector/Additional District Magistrate (Protocol), Varanasi and order dated 21.10.2000, passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, U.P. at Allahabad are quashed. Petitioners shall be refunded the amount deposited under the interim orders passed by this Court along with interest at the Bank rate on the deposit. 15. Let a copy of this Order be sent to the Chief Standing Counsel, State of Uttar Pradesh, for its circulation to all concerned in Uttar Pradesh. ————