Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
G. Madhusudhan Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 23 August, 2024
APHC010362592024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3328]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA
PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO: 18450/2024
Between:
1. G. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY,, S/O. G. SUBBAREDDY, AGED ABOUT
61 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURIST, R/O. D. NO. 7-116, PRAKASH
ROAD, ANANTHAPURAM TOWN, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAM TOWN,
ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAM TOWN,
ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, RAPTADU, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
5. THE SUB REGISTRAR, ANANTHAPURAM RURAL, ANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BANDI SRIHARI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
2
1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS
The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri Bandi Srihari, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Arjun
Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader.
2. The case of the Petitioner is that the Vendor of the Writ Petitioner has
purchased a parcel of a land of an extent of Ac.4.27 cents in Sy.No.261-2
situated in Hampapuram Village, Raptadu Mandal, Ananthapuram District on
10.04.1999 vide E.P.No.1013/1995-1996. The Vendor of the Petitioner has
purchased this in an auction conducted by Cooperative Central Bank in the
recovery proceedings against an Assignee. In other words, on account of the
default by the original assignee the Cooperative Central Bank has brought the
above mentioned parcel of land for sale by way of auction and the Vendor of
the Writ Petitioner has purchased the same on 10.04.1999. The Writ Petitioner
herein has purchased this parcel of land on 28.06.2012 vide Document
No.4345/2012 and sought Registration. The Officials of the Registration
Department have declined to register the Sale Deed in favour of the Writ
Petitioner on the ground that the property purchased by the Writ Petitioner is
mentioned in the Prohibition List under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has cited a Judgment rendered by a
Division Bench of this Court in the Sub-Registrar and others vs. K.
Guravaiah and others; 2009 (2) ALD 250; 2009 (3) ALT 85. Learned
Counsel for the Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to Paragraph
No.19 of the said judgment which would indicate that the assigned lands are
permitted to be mortgaged by the Original Assignees before Cooperative
Banks and that it is lawful for the Bank to bring the property for public auction
in the event of a default. It is also laid down that the sale affected through
such auction is legally valid and the auction purchaser is entitled to mutate his
name in the revenue record as the owner, possessor and enjoyer of such
land. Paragraph No.19 of the above mentioned judgment is usefully extracted
hereunder:
"19. Let us consider the provisions of Section 5 of the Assigned
Lands Act in the light of the facts of the present case. In the
present case, as stated hereinabove, it was open to the original
assignees of the land to mortgage the land to the bank by virtue of
the definition of Section 2 (1). If the mortgage in favour of the bank
was not alienation, there was no restriction with regard to
mortgaging the assigned land in favour of the bank. Thus, the
mortgage was valid. As the mortgage money was not repaid to the
bank, the bank sold the land after following due process of law and
thereby the petitioner became a lawful owner of the land in
question. In view of the above fact, in our opinion, provisions of
section 5 would not operate because the prohibition is on
registration of any document relating to transfer or creation of any
interest in assigned land. In the instant case, the transaction in
pursuance of which the land had been purchased by the petitioner
was valid and not contrary to the provisions of the Assigned
Lands Act. In such a case, in our opinion, if the concerned party
had approached the District Collector for obtaining prior permission,
the District Collector was bound to accord necessary permission in
favour of the person seeking such permission. At the most, the
authorities could have approached the District Collector for seeking
permission under Section 5 and in that event, the District Collector
was bound to give permission in view of the fact that the bank,
admittedly a co-operative society registered under the provisions
of the Co-operative Societies Act, could have become a
mortgagee in respect of the assigned land. "
4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court
to the Online Application made by the Writ Petitioner for deletion of the above
mentioned parcel of land from the Prohibition List of under section 22-A dated
03.04.2024 (Ex.P1).
5. Having considered these aspects, this Court deems it appropriate to
dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the Respondent No.2 to
consider the application dated 03.04.2024 (Ex.P1) and issue proceedings in
accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today and convey such
proceeding to the Writ Petitioner forthwith. Writ Petitioner is directed to submit
a copy of this Order along with the photo copy of the judgment in Sub-
Registrar and others vs. K. Guravaiah and others; 2009 (2) ALD 250;
2009 (3) ALT 85 to Respondent No.2 within two weeks from today.
6. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
No order as to costs.
7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.
_________________________________
GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J
Dt: 23.08.2024
VTS
