Holding

The memorandum is illegal and ultra vires because the requirement of a recommendation from the Assistant Registrar is a superfluous and irrelevant consideration, and therefore the memo is set aside.

Summary

The appellant, a cooperative society registered under the Jharkhand Self‑Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, sought exemption from stamp duty on a land transfer to its members under Section 9A of the Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988. The State, through a memorandum issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Registration, required a recommendation from the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Society before such exemption could be granted. The society challenged the memo as ultra vires, violative of natural justice, and based on irrelevant considerations. The Supreme Court held that the certificate of registration under Section 5(7) is conclusive proof of the society’s existence, making the additional recommendation requirement superfluous and illegal. Consequently, the memo was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the memorandum issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Registration, mandating a recommendation from the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Society as a pre‑condition for availing exemption under Section 9A of the Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988 is ultra vires and illegal
Whether the memorandum violates the principles of natural justice by being issued without a hearing
Whether the Principal Secretary has jurisdiction under the Registration Act, 1908 to impose such a requirement
Whether the requirement of the Assistant Registrar's recommendation is a relevant consideration under administrative law

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. 226
Indian Stamp Act, 1899s. 9
Jharkhand Self‑Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, 1996s. 5, s. 5(7), s. 65
Registration Act, 1908s. 34
Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988s. 9A

Headnote

Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the impugned Memo issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Registration liable to be set aside on the ground of illegality, as it seeks to rely on a superfluous and Amendment) Act, 1988 – s.9A – Powers to reduce, remit or compound stamp duties – Exempting payment of stamp duty on instruments relating to transfer of premises by Cooperative Societies to their members – Issuance of Memo by the Principal Secretary to the Department of

Subjects

Administrative proceduresAdministrative lawJudicial review of administrative actionIllegalityAdministrative decisionRule of law and good governanceRelevant considerationsIrrelevant considerationsMemoSuperfluous and redundant requirementCooperative societyExecutive decisions

Judgment

[2025] 12 S.C.R. 356 : 2025 INSC 1389

Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawlambi Society Ltd.
v.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 14585 of 2025)
05 December 2025
[Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and
Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.]

Issue for Consideration
Issue arose whether the impugned Memo issued by the Principal
Secretary, Department of Registration liable to be set aside on
the ground of illegality, as it seeks to rely on a superfluous and
redundant requirement.

Headnotes†
Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988 – s.9A – Powers to reduce,
remit or compound stamp duties – Exempting payment of
stamp duty on instruments relating to transfer of premises by
Cooperative Societies to their members – Issuance of Memo
by the Principal Secretary to the Department of Registration-
respondent no.2 mandating the District Sub-Registrars to
ensure that exemption u/s.9A will be given only when there
is a recommendation of the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative
Society – Legality:
Held: Administrative procedures should avoid complexity,
redundant requirements, and unnecessary burdens, which waste
time, expense, and disturb peace of mind – While higher courts
set aside executive decisions on the grounds of illegality if they
are not founded on relevant considerations, or even when the
decisions are based on irrelevant considerations – Executive
actions that mandate certain unnecessary, excessive requirements,
must equally be set aside as illegal – Thus, the Memo issued by
the Principal Secretary, Department of Registration, mandating
an additional recommendation of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative
Society of the existence of a Cooperative Society, as a pre-condition
for registration of a document u/s.9A of the 1988 Act is illegal –
Once a cooperative society is registered and a certificate is issued,
s.5(7) declares it to be a conclusive proof of its existence and
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 357

Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawlambi Society Ltd. v.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

continuation as a body corporate – When the certificate serves
the purpose, the additional requirement is unnecessary – Memo
requiring recommendation from Assistant Registrar is based on
irrelevant considerations and it does not offer any value addition
to the integrity of the transaction as alleged – Requirement of
recommendation by the Assistant Registrar as a pre-condition for
registering an instrument transferring premises of a cooperative
society in favour of its members without stamp duty to prevent fake
cooperative societies from claiming benefit of s.9A, an irrelevant
consideration leading to illegality in action – Impugned Memo issued
by Principal Secretary, Department of Registration set aside on
the ground of illegality, as it seeks to rely on a superfluous and
redundant requirement – Administrative Law. [Paras 2, 2.1, 2.2, 15]

Administrative Law – Judicial review of administrative action
on the ground of illegality:
Held: Administrative law has recognised the principal of an
administrative decision becoming unlawful if the decision fails
to take into account relevant considerations, or even when it
takes into account irrelevant considerations – Judicial review of
administrative action on the ground of illegality would then require
consideration of provision of the statute, rules or regulations, or
even a policy empowering exercise of such power or discretion –
This process may seem to be a simple case of interpretation of
the laws, however as judicial review is in the realm of public law,
constitutional courts have the duty to ensure that the power or
discretion is exercised in furtherance of the purpose and object
of the statute, the rule or the regulation, or for implementation
of a policy – In this process while accounting for relevant and
irrelevant considerations that may influence the decision, the court
also takes into account the broader principles of rule of law and
good governance – Irrelevant consideration includes insistence or
performance of acts or submission of documents, which neither
have relevance nor are value additions to the purpose or object of
law or policy in place, instead, are demonstrably superfluous and
unnecessary, consuming limited time and human resource. [Para 9]

List of Acts
Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988; Stamp Act, 1899; Jharkhand
Self-Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, 1996; Constitution of
India; Registration Act, 1908.
358 [2025] 12 S.C.R.

Supreme Court Reports

List of Keywords
Administrative procedures; Administrative law; Judicial review of
administrative action; Illegality; Administrative decision; Rule of
law and good governance; Relevant considerations; Irrelevant
considerations; Memo; Superfluous and redundant requirement;
Cooperative society; Executive decisions.

Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 14585 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 02.08.2023 of the High Court
of Jharkhand at Ranchi in LPA No. 553 of 2022

Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant(s):
Rahul Arya, Ankit Ambastha, Ms. Aahana Jaiswal, Shailendra
Slaria, Bhaskar Aditya.
Advs. for the Respondent(s):
Kumar Anurag Singh, Jayant Mohan, Ms. Meenakshi Chaterjee,
Nilesh Kumar, Ms. Adya Shree Dutta, Ms. Dorjee Ongmu
Lachungpa.

Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court

Judgment

1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. Simplicity in public transactions is good governance. Constitutional
courts uphold this virtue to strengthen the rule of law and ensure
access to justice. In administrative law, simplicity means laws,
regulations, and procedures should be clear, straightforward, and
easy to understand, allowing for effortless compliance. Administrative
procedures should avoid complexity, redundant requirements, and
unnecessary burdens, which waste time, expense, and disturb peace
of mind.
2.1 While higher courts set aside executive decisions on the grounds
of illegality if they are not founded on relevant considerations, or
even when the decisions are based on irrelevant considerations,
it is important to recognize the principle that executive actions
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 359

Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawlambi Society Ltd. v.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

that mandate certain unnecessary, excessive requirements,
must equally be set aside as illegal.
2.2 On this principle, we have held that the Memo issued by the
Principal Secretary, Department of Registration, mandating an
additional recommendation of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative
Society of the existence of a Cooperative Society, as a pre-
condition for registration of a document under Section 9A of
the Indian Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988 as illegal. The
reason is simple. Once a cooperative society is registered and
a certificate is issued, Section 5(7) of the Act declares it to be
a conclusive proof of its existence and continuation as a body
corporate. We have held that when the certificate serves the
purpose, the additional requirement is unnecessary. We have
also noted that the Memo requiring recommendation from
Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Society is based on irrelevant
considerations and it does not offer any value addition to the
integrity of the transaction as alleged.
3. Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 18991 empowers the government
to reduce, remit or compound stamp duties on various instruments.
Section 9A was inserted by the Indian Stamp (Bihar Amendment)
Act, 1988, exempting payment of stamp duty on instruments relating
to transfer of premises by Cooperative Societies to their members.
For ready reference, Section 9A is reproduced below –
“Section 9A. Notwithstanding anything contained in any
rule or orders under clause (a) of section 9 reducing or
remitting the duty on an instrument or class of instruments
in force immediately before the date of commencement
of this section, any instrument, so far as it relates to
premises of a Co-operative Society registered or deemed
to be registered under any law relating to the Co-operative
Society for the time being in force, executed by or on behalf
of or in favour of such society or by an officer or member in
favour of another member and relating to business of such
society shall be chargeable with duty under this section
read with articles indicated in Schedule I-A:
…

1 Hereinafter referred to as the “Stamp Act”.
360 [2025] 12 S.C.R.

Supreme Court Reports

Provided further that an instrument relating to transfer of
premises by a Co-operative Society to be registered in
favour of its members shall not be chargeable with duty:
…”
4. Problem arose in 2009, when the Principal Secretary to the
Department of Registration (respondent no. 2) issued the impugned
Memo number 494, dated 20.02.2009, calling upon the District Sub-
Registrars to ensure that exemption under Section 9A will be given
only when there is a recommendation of the Assistant Registrar,
Cooperative Society. The Memo addressed by the Principal Secretary
to all District Sub-Registrars of the State is reproduced below –

“Jharkhand Government
Registration Department
File No 1/Ni Vi 1079/08
By,
Shri Sudhir Prasad,
Principal Secretary
Registration Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi
To,
All District Sub Registrars,
All Sub Registrars
Ranchi Dated …..2009
Subject: - Regarding giving guidelines for exemption of
stamp duty and registration fee in the deed submitted for
registration by the Cooperative Societies.
Sir,
In relation to the above-mentioned subject, it is said
that under Section 9A of the Indian Stamp Act, there is
complete exemption in stamp and registration fees in the
deed presented for registration for transfer of land and
properties by registered Cooperative Societies. To ensure
that unfair advantage is not taken, it will be essential that
you ensure that-
1. In case of registration of co-operative societies,
exemption will be given only when this matter
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 361

Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawlambi Society Ltd. v.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

is recommended by the Assistant Registrar,
Co-operative Society.
2. The registrar will receive such recommendation and
submit it to the District Under Registrar. In the absence
of such recommendation, exemption will not be given.
Please consider this as urgent.
Yours Faithfully
SD/-
Principal Secretary
Registrar Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi.
Memorandum No.: 494 Dated: 20.02.2009”
5. The appellant is a cooperative society, registered under Section 5
of the Jharkhand Self-Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, 19962,
working with the aim and object of providing housing and other
utilities to its members. As the letter issued by the Principal Secretary
adversely affected their freedom to transfer property with expedition
and efficiency, they approached the High Court by filing a writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia raising the
following grounds -
(i) That by mandating approval by the Assistant Registrar
before registration of a transfer, a new tier has been
created as a hurdle, which is ultra vires the Stamp Act.
(ii) That the Memo directly impinges on the independence
and self-reliance envisaged for co-operative societies
under the 1996 Act.
(iii) That the Assistant Registrar has no authority
whatsoever to grant or reject approval to transfers by
a co-operative society to its members pursuant to an
executive instruction that is contrary to and restrictive
of powers of the registering authority under a central
legislation, that is, the Registration Act, 19083.

2 Hereinafter referred to as “the Cooperative Societies Act, 1996”.
3 Hereinafter referred to as “the Registration Act”.
362 [2025] 12 S.C.R.

Supreme Court Reports

(iv) That respondent no. 2 has passed the impugned
Memo without providing co-operative societies an
opportunity of hearing and has thereby perpetuated
gross violation of principles of natural justice.
6. The Single and the Division Benches of the High Court refused to
exercise judicial review for the following reason -
(i) The impugned letter is not in contravention to the
Stamp Act, generally, or section 9A, in particular.
Rather, the requirement under the letter is necessary
to ensure that only validly registered cooperative
societies get the benefit.
(ii) Under section 34 of the Registration Act, the
registering authority has powers to make inquiries as
to the executants and their representatives as well
as proper stamping and verification of the document
presented for registration. However, this power does
not extend to examination of validity of registration of
a cooperative society and of satisfaction of conditions
for availing stamp duty exemption under section 9A
of the Stamp Act.
(iii) The impugned executive instruction is intended
towards simplifying the process and for benefit of
the co-operative societies.
7. While Mr. Rahul Arya, Advocate, reiterated appellant’s submissions
before the High Court, Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Advocate appearing
for the State, underscored the spirit of Section 9A and submitted that
it is necessary to ensure that fake cooperative societies do not avail
the benefit of the exemption. He also submitted that the Principal
Secretary, Department of Registration is the competent authority to
issue administrative directions to ensure payment of stamp duty and
registration of the document and therefore entitled to direct grant of
exemption only on the recommendation of the Assistant Registrar,
Cooperative Society.
8. The legality of the Memo issued by the Principal Secretary,
Registration Department is subjected to judicial review in the context
of the power vested in him under the Registration Act. Though the
appellants have faintly raised jurisdictional questions about the
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 363

Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawlambi Society Ltd. v.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

legitimacy of the so-called power vested in the Principal Secretary
on the ground that it is unrelated to the statutory provision, the High
Court has not examined this position at all. Even before us, the
submission is confined to the exercise of the power being “arbitrary
and unreasonable”, rather than it being without jurisdiction. We will
therefore confine our enquiry to the exercise of power.
9. Administrative law has well recognised the principal of an administrative
decision becoming unlawful if the decision fails to take into account
relevant considerations, or even when it takes into account irrelevant
considerations. Judicial review of administrative action on the ground
of illegality would then require consideration of provision of the statute,
rules or regulations, or even a policy empowering exercise of such
power or discretion. This process may seem to be a simple case of
interpretation of the laws, however as judicial review is in the realm
of public law, constitutional courts have the duty to ensure that the
power or discretion is exercised in furtherance of the purpose and
object of the statute, the rule or the regulation, or for that matter
implementation of a policy. In this process while accounting for relevant
and irrelevant considerations that may influence the decision, the
court also takes into account the broader principles of rule of law
and good governance. Irrelevant consideration includes insistence
or performance of acts or submission of documents, which neither
have relevance nor are value additions to the purpose or object of
law or policy in place. Instead, they are demonstrably superfluous and
unnecessary, consuming limited time and human resource. This also
has a direct bearing on efficiency and good governance. It appears
to us that the benefit granted to a cooperative society under Section
9A of the Bihar Amendment Act is sought to be regulated by the
Principal Secretary of the Department of Registration to ensure that
the benefit is not misused by what he terms as fake societies. With
this objective, the Principal Secretary, in exercise of his power and
discretion, directed all the registering authorities of the State not to
register a document till recommendation of the Assistant Registrar of
Cooperative Society is obtained. It is this endeavour of the Principal
Secretary that is subjected to judicial review. We will examine the
legality of this decision.
10. The Indian Stamp Act is a fiscal enactment, primary object of which
is to raise and collect revenue for the State. The power of the State
to impose and collect stamp duty and prevent evasion also extends
364 [2025] 12 S.C.R.

Supreme Court Reports

to reducing, remitting or compounding duties, if the State is of the
opinion that such a measure is necessary.4
11. In order to encourage cooperative movement, the Bihar legislature
introduced Section 9A by the Indian Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act,
1988, the effect of which is that an instrument relating to transfer of
a premises by a Cooperative Society to its members shall not be
chargeable with stamp duty. Section 9A has the effect of creating a
right in favour of cooperative societies and also of imposing a statutory
duty on the authorities; a right in the sense that the cooperative
societies can transfer premises to their members without stamp duty
and a duty in the sense that instruments of transfer by cooperative
societies to their members shall be registered by the authorities
without any further requirement of stamp duty.
12. The requirement of recommendation by the Assistant Registrar,
Cooperative Society as a pre-condition for registering an instrument
transferring premises of a cooperative society in favour of its
members without stamp duty to prevent fake cooperative societies
from claiming benefit of Section 9A is, in our opinion, an irrelevant
consideration leading to illegality in action. Such a pre-condition is
clearly superfluous and in fact, unnecessary. The following is the
explanation.
13. A cooperative society in Jharkhand, like the appellant herein,
registered under Section 5, acquires the status of a body corporate
under Section 65. Such a cooperative society will be entitled to display
its name at its office, issue notices, official publications, business
letters, bills of exchange, etc.6 in its own name. The effect of being a
body corporate is in fact evident from Section 5(7) of the Act, which
declares that, “where a cooperative society is registered, the certificate
of registration signed and sealed by the Registrar shall be conclusive

4 See Section 9 of Indian Stamp Act.
5 Section 6 Cooperative Society to be a body corporate
(1) The Cooperative Society shall be a body corporate by the name under which it is registered having
perpetual succession and a common seal. The Cooperative Society shall be entitled to a acquire, hold
and dispose of property, to enter into contracts on its behalf, to institute and defend suits and other legal
proceedings and to take all such steps necessary to achieve its objectives.
(2) All transactions entered into in good faith prior to registration, furtherance of the purposes of the
Cooperative Society shall be deemed to be transactions of the Cooperative Society after registration.
(3) A Cooperative Society may be registered with limited liability and it shall have the word “limited” as
suffix to its name.
6 See Section 7 of the 1996 Act.
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 365

Adarsh Sahkari Grih Nirman Swawlambi Society Ltd. v.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

evidence”. A cumulative reading of Chapter II of the 1996 Act, under
which any cooperative society in Jharkhand is registered, is that the
certificate of registration is conclusive evidence of the existence of
the cooperative society. The State and its instrumentalities are bound
by this certification and no further question should arise about the
existence or authenticity of the cooperative society. The certificate
is a recognition and a declaration of the State that the cooperative
society is continuing on statutorily maintained roll.
14. In lieu of the certificate granted by the Registrar, Cooperative Society,
which certificate would necessarily be enclosed with the instrument
presented for registration by the cooperative society for registration,
the further requirement of a recommendation by the Assistant
Registrar, Cooperative Society is superfluous and unnecessary.
This requirement, in our opinion, is disruptive of ease of transaction,
without any value addition to the integrity of the transaction. Such
question would not arise in the teeth of the statutory declaration
under Section 5(7), wherein a certification of the cooperative society
by the Registrar, Cooperative Society is a conclusive proof.
15. In view of the above, we have no hesitation in holding that the
impugned Memo issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of
Registration is set aside on the ground of illegality, as it seeks to
rely on a superfluous and redundant requirement.
16. For the reasons stated above, the Appeal is allowed against the
judgment and order of the High Court of Jharkhand in LPA No. 553
of 2022.

Result of the case: Appeal allowed.

†
Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain