Pinnama Raju Santosh Kumar And 4 ... vs State Of Telangana And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5918 Tel

  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

                  WRIT PETITION No.41658 of 2022
ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing

for the respondents.

2. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is

that though the subject plots are situated in an approved layout, the

respondent-Sub Registrar refused to register the sale deed presented

by the petitioners vide pending document No.92 of 2022 and passed

a refusal order No.3 of 2022 refusing to register the said document.

The reasons given by the respondent-Sub Registrar reads as under:

"Reasons for refusal (Doct No.P/92/2022):

The said document can't be registered as per the standing order 219

(b) of Registration Manual (Part-II) which prohibits alienation of the property due to status-quo orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (civil) No.19695 of 2021 dated 18.05.2022 and orders communicated by Commissioner & Inspector General Registration and stamps Department in Memo No.G2/257/2019, dt.19.05.2022, therefore, it is hereby refuse the registration of the document for violation of statute. An appeal on this order lies with District Registrar within 30 days from the date of this order."

3. It is the specific contention of Sri K.Raghuveer Reddy,

learned counsel for the petitioners that the Memo referred in the

impugned order has no application to the plots situated in an

approved layout and the same was also clarified by a Division Bench MSK,J wp_41658_2022

of this Court in W.P (PIL) No.210 of 2020, dated 28.07.2021. The

relevant portion of the said judgment reads as under:

"Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 stating inter alia that pursuant to the issuance of Memo dated 26.08.2020, it was noticed that certain difficulties have been faced by the public. To obviate the said difficulties, modification of the aforesaid instructions has been issued on 29.12.2020, whereby registrations have been permitted in respect of open plots/structures, if the same have been acquired by the present owner through a valid registered document executed earlier. However it has been directed that no new plot shall be registered, unless it is approved by the competent authority or is in an authorized layout. The connotation of the word 'new plot' is a fresh plot which is brought for registration for the first time or being sold by the developers for the first time. It has also been clarified that there is no restriction on registration of plots in authorized layouts, plots regularized under earlier LRs schemes and buildings/structures covered under earlier BPS/BRS schemes.

2. Mr.Harender Parshad, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents states that there is no prohibition on alienation/transfer of individual property. The prohibition is only for registration of plots/structures registered by the developers in an unauthorized layout or structures".

4. In view of specific contention raised by learned counsel

for the petitioners that the subject plots are part of an approved

layout approved by the Gram Panchayat concerned, this Court does

not find any justification for the respondent-Sub Registrar in

refusing to register the document presented for registration in MSK,J wp_41658_2022

respect of the subject plots by placing reliance on the Memo, dated

19.05.2022. Further, by virtue of Section 71 of the Registration Act,

1908, the respondent-Sub Registrar is under obligation to receive the

document and process the same, in accordance with law.

5. Therefore, the action of the respondent-Sub Registrar in

passing impugned refusal order refusing to register document in

respect of the subject plots by placing reliance on the Memo, dated

19.05.2022, is totally arbitrary and illegal. The Judgment of this

Court in W.P.No.9248 of 2021, dated 23.08.2021 and the Memo

referred in the impugned order are in respect of unauthorized

construction and the plots, which are in an unapproved layout but

not in respect of the plots, which are part of an approved layout.

Thus, there cannot be any impediment for the respondents to

register the document in respect of the plots, if such plots are part of

an approved layout and also in respect of the plots, which were

already subjected to registration on an earlier occasion. Equally, the

interim order passed in SLP (Civil) No.19695 of 2021, dated

18.05.2022 is not a ground to refuse to entertain registration in

respect of the plots, if they are part of an approved layout.

6. In the light of the above, the impugned order is set aside

and respondent No.3 is further directed to receive the returned

document in respect of the subject plots and also process the same, MSK,J wp_41658_2022

in accordance with law, by duly verifying the same as to whether

they are part of an approved layout or not and take a decision

thereon afresh, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks

from the date of presentation of the said document by the

petitioners.

7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

shall stand closed.

____________________________________ MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J Date:16.11.2022 Note: Issue C.C. by one week.

(B/o) YVL MSK,J wp_41658_2022

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.41658 of 2022

Date:16.11.2022 YVL