Kayam Suneetha, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 4585 AP

               HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
                      MAIN CASE NO.: W.P.No.22067 of 2022
                                 PROCEEDING SHEET



Sl.No.     Date                                  ORDER                             OFFICE
                                                                                    NOTE

         25.07.2022   DR,J
                                         I.A.No.1 of 2022
                             This application is filed seeking direction
                      against the Respondent No.4 to receive, register

and release the document No.P 408/2022 dated 25.02.2022 without reference to the intimation of refusal dated 02.03.2022 relating to the property i.e., Plot No.66 part, Door No.8- 3/2, House measuring an extent of 175.58 sq.yards or 1580.25 square feets situated at Sri Padmavathi Co-operative House Building Society Colony situated in Sy.No.229/2, Paimasi No.464 of Tiruchanur Village Patta No.60(Old patta No.146), No.11, Tiruchanur Village, old ward No.14, New Padmavathipuram Gram Panchayat & Residential area No.36, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Renigunta, Sri Balaji Registration District belonging to the petitioner 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 N.Chandra Sekhar Reddy, 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(4) weeks for filing counter affidavit.

______ DR, J tm