Ghanshyam Rajak v. State Of West Bengal And ORS

Item no.41 12.08.2025 Saswata Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Jurisdiction Ghanshyam Rajak -versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Suman Sehanabis (Mondal) Mr. Kunaljit Bhattacharjee Ms. Aritri Chakraborty ...For the Petitioner Mr. Hirak Barman Mr. Sourav Sarkar ...For the State.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the District Registrar, Jalpaiguri being the respondent no. 4 to complete the registration of the deed which is shown as pending deed being P 6032/2022.

2. According to the petitioner the petitioner is ready and willing to make payment of the deficit stamp duty and the registration fees as may be notified by the respondent no. 4.

3. Although, Mr. Barman learned advocate appearing for the State submits that previously the petitioner had been notified with regard to the deficit stamp duty and registration fees, however, there appears to be a dispute in this regard since Ms. Sehanabis, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that no

such intimation was ever forwarded to the petitioner.

4. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and noting from the report filed by the District Registrar, Jalpaiguri dated 12th August 2025 which is taken on record that the authorities are trying to generate duplicate deed in respect of Serial no. 6032/2025 based on manual assessment, however, since the office is facing problem while generating e-assessment slip for the duplicate deed as no such option was found in the eNathikaran system to generate duplicate query in the backlog deed, there has been delay.

5. According to the District Registrar, Jalpaiguri the aforesaid technical problem was notified to the Directorate as well as to the NIC vide communication dated 24th April 2025. It would further transpire from the aforesaid report that valuation has been done and the parties would be informed with regard to the stamp duty and the registration fee payable as soon as the technical issue is resolved.

6. Having regard to the aforesaid, I am of the view that since valuation has already been made, the respondents should immediately

intimate the petitioner with regard to the aforesaid valuation. As, no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending, I direct the respondent no. 4 to notify the petitioner of the deficit stamp duty and the registration fees within a period of 6 weeks from the date of communication of this order since according to Mr. Barman the aforesaid period would be sufficient for resolving the technical issues, and upon the petitioner making payment of the deficit stamp duty and registration fees, to forthwith cause such deed to be registered in accordance with law.

7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

8. All parties shall act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from this Court's official website.

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)