Bombay HC asks govt to consider licence for new vendors, e-stamp facilities – The Indian Express

A division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav J Jamdar on Thursday passed the order while disposing of a PIL by lawyer Swapnil Sadhu Kadam, who argued through advocate Uday Warunjikar and Sumit Kate.

The PIL sought e-stamp facilities across the state like those available in the National Capital Region (NCR)-Delhi and other states. It also sought adequate stamp vendors in Mumbai considering growth of population and litigation and also sought an inquiry into alleged illegal sale and purchase of stamp papers across the state by certain recalcitrant stamp vendors.

Stamp papers are used for the execution of documents including agreements, sale deeds and affidavits.

The state government, in its reply, stated that “it is true that presently stamp vendor licenses in Mumbai city are smaller in number but, over a period of time, there is also a decrease in demand for physical stamp paper purchase due to digital options made available to deposit stamp duty in government treasury”, resulting in decline in number of private vendors.

The revenue department further stated that in 2020-21, in Mumbai city, out of Rs 9,259 crore stamp duty, 98 per cent revenue — Rs 9,102 crore — was from e-challan, Rs 94 crore (1.02 per cent) from franking machine and Rs 63 crore (0.68 per cent) from physical stamp papers.

It said the number of buyers is more in the category of franking and physical stamped papers as requirement for the same includes single paper of Rs 100 or Rs 500, need for which is peculiar and cannot be equated with bulk stamp duty purchase/sale of immovable properties. Therefore, buyers have to gather at places to buy stamp papers resulting in long queues.

The bench said it would not examine the matter in any further depth, as the policy decision has to be taken by the state government to address the concerns raised by the petitioner and it would not be proper for the court to make any mandatory direction on that behalf.

However, the bench said “considering that dearth of stamp vendors could pose problems for many and also in view of the fact that the petitioner has submitted a representation, we are of the considered view that interest of justice would be sufficiently served if this PIL petition is disposed of with directions”, including consideration of the representation.