S.B.MAJMUDAR, J. - (1.)IN this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who was the owner of a property consisting of land admeasuring about 357 sq. mtrs. (428 sq. yards) along with the superstructure bearing sub -plot No. 6/2 of Final Plot Nos. 306 -307 and 308 of the Town Planning Scheme No. 8 at Mithakhali in this town, has brought in challenge the order passed on January 31, 1992, by members of the appropriate authority functioning under section 269UD of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The challenge at this stage of the final hearing of this petition is confined to two deductions made by the appropriate authorities from the amount held payable to the petitioner for compulsory purchase of the aforesaid property by the Central Government. These disputed deduction are : (a) Rs. 35,333; and (b) Rs. 1,02,062.
(2.)IN order to appreciate the controversy centering round the two disputed amounts, it is necessary to note a few introductory facts :
As noted earlier, the petitioner was the owner of the aforesaid property. He had entered into an agreement of sale dated October 30, 1991, with Messrs. Manipal Saubhagya Nidhi Limited (purchaser) for the sale of the said property for a consideration of Rs. 17,75,000. The purchaser had paid to the petitioner on execution of the agreement a sum of Rs. 4,50,000 as earnest money. The said agreement was registered with the Sub -Registrar, Ahmedabad, at Sr. No. 27198 on October 30, 1991. As per Chapter XX -C of the Act, a provision is made for purchase by the Central Government of immovable property in certain cases of transfer. In this Chapter are found section 269U to section 269UO. These provisions confer a statutory right of pre -emption on the Central Government to purchase any immovable property which is sought to be sold by the seller to the purchaser on an apparent consideration of the amount mentioned in the agreement of sale provided the prescribed value of the transfer of any immovable property exceeded Rs. 5,00,000 which, at the relevant time, was Rs. 10,00,000. We are told at the Bar that, as on this date also, the said prescription continues : As the agreement of sale in the present case was for an apparent consideration of Rs. 17,75,000, the seller and the purchaser had to follow the procedure laid down by section 269UC of the Act. The said provision reads as under :

'Section 269UC. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), or in any other law for the time being in force, no transfer of any immovable property of such value exceeding five lakh rupees as may be prescribed, shall be effected except after an agreement for transfer is entered into between the person who intends transferring the immovable property (hereinafter referred to as 'the transferor'), and the person to whom it is proposed to be transferred (hereinafter referred to as 'the transferee'), in accordance with the provisions of sub -section (2) at least three months before the intended date of transfer.

(2) The agreement referred to in sub -section (1) shall be reduced to writing in the form of a statement by each of the parties to such transfer or by any of the parties to such transfer acting on behalf of himself and on behalf of the other parties. (3) Every statement referred to in sub -section (2) shall, - (i) be in the prescribed form; (ii) set forth such particulars as may be prescribed; and (iii) be verified in the prescribed manner, and shall be furnished to the appropriate authority in such manner and within such time as may be prescribed, by each of the parties to such transaction or by any of the parties to such transaction action on behalf of himself and on behalf of the other parties.'

On the basis of the statements furnished by the concerned parties under section 269UC(2), the appropriate authority, in exercise of its powers under section 269UD(1), passed an order for the purchase by the Central Government of the aforesaid immovable property at an amount equal to the amount of apparent consideration. The said provision, apart from the provisos with which we are not concerned, reads as under :

'269UD. (1) The appropriate authority, after the receipt of the statement under sub -section (3) of section 269UC in respect of any immovable property, may, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law or any instrument or any agreement for the time being in force, and for reasons to be record in writing, make an order for the purchase by the Central Government of such immovable property at an amount equal to the amount of the apparent consideration :......'

(3.)THE said order of the appropriate authority is annexed at annexure B to the petition. When this petition was originally filed in this court, the order was challenged on the ground that it had become infructuous and incompetent as the amount to be paid to the petitioner or seller by the Central Government was not paid within the requisite time and, therefore, the appropriate authority was required to return the property to the petitioner as it stood revisited in the petitioner. But that challenge was given up at the time when this petition was moved for admission and the challenge in this petition was confined only to the aforesaid two disputed amounts which are deducted by the appropriate authority from the total amount held payable to the petitioner, as per section 269UC(1) read with section 269UD(1). The liability to make payment flows from section 269UF(1), which provides that, where an order for the purchase of any immovable property by the Central Government is made under sub -section (1) of section 269UD, the Central Government shall pay, by way of consideration for such purchase, an amount equal to the amount of the apparent consideration.