Judgment Ravi R.Tripathi, J.—Heard, learned Advocate Mr. Choksi for the petitioners. 2. Rule. At the request of the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the with consent of learned AGP Mr. Rindani, the matter is taken up for final disposal today. 3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner vehemently submitted that in the present case, the document which was registered on 28th January 2004, final order is passed on 10th December 2008 and that too, interestingly, the entire order is passed keeping all the information ‘blank’. A copy of the said order is produced at Annexure “F” page 18 to this petition. 4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that first show-cause notice dated 20th September 2005 was served to the petitioner, which was replied by the petitioner on 27th September 2005. Thereafter, again, show-cause notice dated (blank) February 2006 was served to the petitioner, which was replied on 22nd February 2006. Without replying to the show-cause notice and without furnishing any details to the petitioners as to how the deficit stamp duty of Rs.72,000/- is levied on the document, the order impugned is passed. 5. Learned AGP submitted that alternative remedy of filing a revision application against the order impugned is available to the petitioner. 6. The fact that the authority - Deputy Collector has passed an order in a very cryptic manner and that too, without even filling in the blank in the order, itself shows the sheer non-application of mind on the part of the Deputy Collector and hence, the Court is of the opinion that it will be in the interest of justice to quash the order impugned rather than relegating the petitioner to the alternative remedy. Accordingly, order dated 10th December, 2008 is quashed and set aside. 7. At the request of the learned AGP, it is made clear that it will be open for the authority to pass a fresh order. 8. At the request of the learned Advocate for the petitioner, it is made clear that it will be in fitness of things, if the Deputy Collector gives him an opportunity of hearing. 9. To see that no further time is invested in serving show-cause notice, the petitioner is directed to remain present before the Deputy Collector on 17th September 2009. At the request of the learned Advocate for the petitioner, it is made clear that it will be in fitness of things, if the Deputy Collector gives him an opportunity of hearing. 9. To see that no further time is invested in serving show-cause notice, the petitioner is directed to remain present before the Deputy Collector on 17th September 2009. If, for some reason or the other it is not convenient to the Deputy Collector to hear the petitioner on that day, he may give another date for hearing to the petitioner. As the matter is old enough, it is expected that the matter will be decided as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 08 (eight) weeks from the date on which the Deputy Collector hears the matter. 10. With this, present petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. P P P P P