Reaffirming that only biennial revision lies with the DLVC, while percentage enhancement is a Collector’s power under Rule 40(2) – binding authority for Odisha valuation procedures
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP(C)/720/2024 of BINOD CHANDRA PADHI Vs STATE OF ODISHA |
| CNR | ODHC010012472024 |
| Date of Registration | 12-01-2024 |
| Decision Date | 26-08-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA |
| Court | Orissa High Court |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Precedent Value | Binding on Odisha valuation authorities; reaffirms existing Orissa Division Bench precedents |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms |
| Type of Law | Administrative / Stamp Duty Valuation |
| Questions of Law | Whether the DLVC may enhance bench mark valuation by arbitrary percentages or is confined to fixing revised values biennially, leaving only 10 % enhancement to the Collector under Rule 40(2)? |
| Ratio Decidendi | The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 vest in the DLVC only the power to fix or revise bench mark valuation for two-year periods under Rules 40 and 41. Enhancement by percentage is a distinct power of the Collector under Rule 40(2). |
| Judgments Relied Upon |
|
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Statutory interpretation of Rules 37, 40, 41 and related provisions of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952; strict compliance principle for statutory procedure |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The DLVC’s January 2022 resolution enhanced bench mark valuations by percentages without (a) a proper biennial revision, (b) compliance with Rule 37’s composition requirements, or (c) clear reasons or application of mind. |
| Citations | WP(C)/720/2024; CNR ODHC010012472024 |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All valuation committees, Registrars and Sub-Registrars in Odisha |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts considering stamp valuation procedures |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The DLVC may only fix or revise bench mark valuation for two-year periods under Rules 40 and 41; any percentage enhancement power lies exclusively with the Collector under Rule 40(2).
- Failure to comply with Rule 37’s nomination of expert valuers invalidates a DLVC resolution.
- Applications under Article 226 can compel strict compliance with statutory valuation procedures.
- Quashing of Annexure 1 underscores the principle that administrative bodies cannot exceed procedural mandates.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Rules 40 and 41 empower the DLVC only to fix or biennially revise market value guidelines; they do not authorize percentage enhancements.
- Rule 40(2) grants the Collector (as DLVC chairman) a separate power to enhance the last fixed value by 10 % if the DLVC fails to revise within two years.
- Rule 37 mandates inclusion of expert valuers in the DLVC; non-compliance voids committee resolutions.
- Reliance on two Division Bench precedents (Guruprasad Mohanty and Capital Bar Association) to reaffirm limited DLVC authority and strict procedural adherence.
- Application of inherent writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to quash the ultra vires resolution and mandate fresh valuation in compliance with statutory rules.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- DLVC’s Annexure 1 resolution enhanced bench mark valuation by arbitrary percentages (over 100 %) without following statutory revision procedure.
- No evidence of proper DLVC composition under Rule 37 or reasons assigned; resolution is devoid of “application of mind.”
Opposite Parties (State)
- Annexure 1 was prepared by a duly constituted DLVC and complies with law; not liable to be quashed.
Factual Background
Binod Chandra Padhi challenged a DLVC resolution dated 27 January 2022 that enhanced bench mark valuations across Ganjam District by percentages without fixing specific values through a biennial revision. The petitioner alleged lack of compliance with Rule 37 (committee composition) and Rules 40–41 (revision procedure), prompting a writ under Articles 226/227 seeking quashing of the Annexure.
Statutory Analysis
- Rule 37: Constitution of DLVC; Collector as chairman; nomination of two public persons (one expert valuer).
- Rule 40: Issue and biennial revision of market value guidelines; Rule 40(2) empowers Collector to enhance by 10 % on DLVC’s failure.
- Rule 41: Procedure for preparation of market value, requiring application of valuation principles and official instructions.
- Rules 44–46: Special revisions, public notices, enquiry powers, and grievance referrals; ensure transparency and compliance.
- Conclusion: Only biennial revisions by DLVC; percentage enhancements are outside DLVC’s power.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The decision reaffirms established Orissa Division Bench rulings on DLVC powers.
Citations
- Guruprasad Mohanty & Anr. v. State of Odisha & Ors., AIR 2009 (Orissa) 172 (D.B.)
- Capital Bar Association, Bhubaneswar v. State of Orissa & Ors., 2013 (I) OLR 344
- WP(C)/720/2024; CNR ODHC010012472024