Telangana High Court
Chinnagundu Srinivas vs State Of Telangana, on 13 October, 2023
Bench: Chillakur Sumalatha
HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT PETITION No.28774 OF 2023
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking an order in the nature of
writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.3 in
refusing to register and release the sale deed presented by the
petitioners in respect of Plot No.26, admeasuring 405 square
yards, located in Sy.No.19/47/Part of Ashok Nagar, Ammapally
Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal
and arbitrary and consequently, to direct respondent No.3 to
register and release the said document.
2. Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel
for the writ petitioners, as well as Sri B.Dileep Kumar, learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration who
is representing respondent Nos.1 to 3.
3. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners states that basing
on the notification dated 26.09.2013 that was issued by the
District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, the Registering
Authority is refusing to proceed with the registration and
indeed, the said notification was held to be not valid by this
Court through orders in W.P.No.14656 of 2021, dated
Dr.CSL,J
W.P.No.28774 of 2023
01.07.2021. A perusal of the order that is referred discloses
that the said order pertains to the land in Sy.No.19/47,
Ammapally Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy
District. Thus, the subject matter is same. In the said
decision, the Court observed as follows:-
"3. The issue of inclusion of properties in the prohibited
list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short,
'the Act') was considered by the Full Bench of this Court in
VINJAMURI RAJAGOPALA CHARY v. STATE OF ANDHRA
PRADESH 1 giving several directions. Insofar as this Writ
Petition is concerned, paragraph No.25.3 of the said judgment
is relevant where under the District Collector is vested power
to notify the District Registrar/Registering Authority that the
subject properties are Government properties and no deed of
conveyance can be entertained.
4. In the case on hand, what was issued by the District
Collector was only a notification calling for objections and so
far he has not exercised the power vested under Section 22-A
of the Act. The issue of inclusion of properties in the prohibited
list, not accepting the documents for registration and the
scope of Section 22-A of the Act were elaborately considered
by the Full Bench of this Court.
5. It is also appropriate to note at this stage that the
decision of the Full Bench of this Court was carried to the
Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4019 of 2018 and batch.
The Supreme Court granted liberty to the petitioners therein
and any other aggrieved person to challenge the validity of
2015(3) ALT 96
Dr.CSL,J
W.P.No.28774 of 2023
Section 22-A of the Act and directed the High Court to decide
the said validity. The Supreme Court has also granted interim
direction of registration of deeds of conveyance, but such
registration was directed to be treated as provisional subject
to the result of the writ petitions now pending before the High
Court and the parties should not claim any additional equity.
6. The Gazette notification dated 26.09.2013 was
considered in W.P.No.19069 of 2014. Paragraph No.12 of the
judgment dated 25.08.2014 reads as under:
"Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-
Registrar to receive and process the deeds of conveyance
without reference to the District Gazette notification dated
26.09.2013 in accordance with the Indian Registration Act,
1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. However, it is open to
the registering authority to refuse to register the deeds
presented before him, if he has any other objection, by duly
assigning reasons in support of such decision and
communicate the decision to the petitioners. It is made clear
that mere registration of deed of conveyance does not confer
title to the property and it is made clear that this order does
not preclude the Government to take appropriate steps as
warranted by law and to assert its title. No costs."
4. No material, whatsoever, is placed before this Court to
show that after the notification that was issued by the District
Collector calling for objections, power granted under Section
22A of the Registration Act was exercised and that the
properties were included in the prohibitory list.
Dr.CSL,J
W.P.No.28774 of 2023
5. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petition
is required to be disposed of giving necessary direction to the
Registering Authority to receive and register the documents
presented in case, the documents are in compliance with the
provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and Indian Stamp Act,
1899.
6. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following
direction:-
"The Registering Authority is directed to receive and
register the subject document without reference to the
notification dated 26.09.2013 in case, the document is in
compliance with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908
and Indian Stamp Act, 1899. If the Registering Authority
finds that the document is prohibited for registration, it
shall pass necessary orders to that effect and communicate
its decision to the petitioners in writing. There shall be no
order as to costs."
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________
Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
Date:13.10.2023
dr
