AMITAVA LALA, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed by fifteen petitioner companies challenging the respective notices issued to them to appear in person or through counsel before the Additional Collector (Finance & Revenue), Ghaziabad on a particular date and time to show cause as to why the stamp duty should not be imposed upon them initiating proceedings under Section 29 (e) read with Article 31 of Schedule I-B and Section 33 (4) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter in short called as the 'Stamp Act') in pursuance of order of the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ghaziabad. It was further mentioned in the notice that if explanation is not received within a particular period, it will be deemed that petitioners have nothing to say in this regard and in absence thereof an order will be passed imposing stamp duty and penalty, which may be ten times of the deficient stamp duty recoverable as arrears of land revenue along with interest.
(2.) Since the same cause of action arose to all the petitioners, they have jointly filed this writ petition, however, upon payment of respective court fees applicable to the individual petitioners.
(3.) Normally the Court does not interfere with the notice to show cause, therefore, this Court wanted answer to such preliminary point from the petitioners. In answer to that, Mr. C.B. Yadav, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, contended that it is true normally the Court does not interfere with the show cause notice but when the show cause notice is issued without jurisdiction, the Court is entitled to interfere with it.;