- (1.) Heard Sri S.K.Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.P. Singh Kachhwah, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri M.N. Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.3.
(2.) The question involved in this petition is regarding stamp duty to be charged on security deposit under the Stamp Duty Act. This question has been considered in detail by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.35096 of 2004 (M/s Strong Construction v. State of U.P. and others) decided on 22.3.2005 along with 91 other connected petitions.
(3.) In view of aforesaid, the respondents are directed not to compel the petitioners to pay stamp duty on security deposit in question treating it as "mortgage deed" and to charge stamp duty on such security as provided under Article 57(b) of Schedule 1-B of the Indian Stamp Act.;