C.Mohan Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 3948 AP

               HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
                      MAIN CASE NO.: W.P.No.20173 of 2022
                                 PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.No.     Date                                   ORDER                             OFFICE
                                                                                     NOTE
         12.07.2022
                      DR,J
                                        I.A.No.1 of 2021
                             This application is filed seeking direction
                      against the Respondent No.4 to receive, register

and release the document of deposit of title deed relating to the land admeasuring an extent of 242 square yards or 2178 Sq.feet in Sy.No.309/1 & 2 now after sub-divsiion Sy.Nos.309/1b & 2 of Pedda Cheruvvu Pachal Patta No.60, Paimashi No.464, 11th Ward near Yogimallavaram, C.Sesha Reddy, Residential Area No.36, Tiruchanoor Village Accounts, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati, Chittoor Distict (Now Sri Balaji District) without reference to the proceedings of 2nd respondent in Lr.No.M1/9580/2016 dated 05.07.2016 pending disposal of the writ petition.

Basing on the judgment of the Apex Court in Siri Nivasam Mutual Aided House Building Society Ltd and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others (Special Leave Petition (C) NO. 15009 OF 2016 dated 19.04.2018), the Apex Court held as follows:

"It is ordered that the registration already permitted by this Court shall be treated as a provisional registration subject to the result of the writ petitions now pending before the High Court. We make it clear that merely because a provisional registration has been permitted, the parties shall not claim any additional equity. We further make it clear that without express permission from the High Court, there shall be no further transfer. In order to avoid further difficulty to the similarly situated people, we make it clear that it will be open to them to approach the High Court and seek appropriate and similar interim orders regarding transfers during the pendency of the writ petitions." Taking advantage of the last sentence of the direction issued by the Apex Court, Sri Md.Saleem, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, requests to issue a similar direction.

A direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is binding on the Court and also officials in the State. The Hon'ble Supreme Court directed that, similarly situated persons can approach this Court and obtain a similar order. Therefore, in view of the direction issued by the Apex Court, the petitioner approached this Court to seek same relief.

Hence, Respondent No.4 is directed to receive and register the document provisionally, submitted by the petitioner and release the same. Such registration shall be treated as provisional registration, subject to result of the present writ petition. As provisional registration is permitted by this Court, the parties shall not claim additional equity, while making it clear that without express permission from the High Court, there shall not be no further transfer.

Accordingly, an interim direction is issued as claimed by the petitioner.

Post after four weeks for filing counter affidavit.

______ DR, J Pnr