Telangana High Court
Sri Gadiraju Latchiraju vs The State Of Telangana on 19 February, 2025
THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
WRIT PETITION No.4816 of 2025
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"...to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in
the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the
2nd respondent i.e., The Sub Registrar, Shamshabad,
Ranga Reddy District, in refusing to receive and register the
Sale Deed in respect of all that the House bearing No.3-
294/A/2, PTIN No.1199131086, admeasuring 1725
Sq.Yards., having plinth area admeasuring 200 Sq.Feet.,
Covered by A.C.C., in Sy.Nos.219/1/A1 and 220/1/A1,
situated at Chinna Gollpally Village (Gollapally Khurd)
Shamshabad Municipality, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga
Reddy District, on the ground that the survey numbers
where the Petitioner's property is situated are notified
under as prohibited property under section 22-A of
Registration Act, 1. As per the prohibitory watch register of
this office, the above Sy.Nos.219 and 220, are covered
under the Prohibition Register Under Section 22 (A) of
Registration Act, 1908, vide Notified Gazzette
No.G.O.Ms.No.786 dated 09.11.1999, 2. As per the
Tahsildhar Notification of Government Lands, the above
Sy.Nos.219 and 220 are classified as "Patta acquired by
Government", communicated by the Tahsildhar,
Shamshabad vide Lr.No.B/230/2012, dated 09.03.2012
(copies enclosed) and 3. As per the District Collector, Ranga
Reddy District, Notification, the above Sy.Nos.219/1 and
220/1 were notified as Kharrij Khata Under Section 22-A
(1) (a), vide Lr.No.E5/4985/2013/Shamshabad/Chinna
JAK, J
Gollapally dated 26.09.2013 (copies enclosed), is illegal,
arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of
Constitution of India and also in violation of Registration
Act, 1908, besides in violation of Principles of Natural
Justice and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein
to receive and register the Sale Deed in respect of all that
the House bearing No.3-294/A/2, PTIN No.1199131086,
admeasuring 1725 Sq.Yards., having plinth area
admeasuring 200 Sq.Feet., Covered by A.C.C., in
Sy.Nos.219/1/A1 and 220/1/A1, situated at Chinna
Gollpally Village (Gollapally Khurd) Shamshabad
Municipality, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,
on the ground that the survey numbers where the
Petitioner's property is situated are notified under as
prohibited property under section 22-A of Registration Act
1. As per the prohibitory watch register of this office, the
above Sy.Nos.219 and 220, are covered under the
Prohibition Register Under Section 22 (A) of Registration
Act, 1908, vide Notified Gazzette No.G.O.Ms.No.786 dated
09.11.1999, 2. As per the Tahsildhar Notification of
Government Lands, the above Sy.Nos.219 and 220 are
classified as "Patta acquired by Government",
communicated by the Tahsildhar, Shamshabad vide
Lr.No.B/230/2012, dated 09.03.2012 (copies enclosed)
and 3. As per the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District,
Notification, the above Sy.Nos.219/1 and 220/1 were
notified as Kharrij Khata Under Section 22-A (1) (a), vide
Lr.No.E5/4985/2013/Shamshabad/Chinna Gollapally
dated 26.09.2013 (copies enclosed) and pass...."
` 2. Heard Mr. Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel
appearing for petitioner, and Ms. S.Sravanthi, learned
JAK, J
Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration
appearing for respondents.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner
herein, vide sale deed dated 26.11.2024, purchased a house
bearing No.3-294/A/2, PTIN No.1199131086, admeasuring
1725 Sq.Yards or 1443.51 Sq meters, having plinth area
admeasuring 200 Sq feet, covered by A.C.C. in survey
Nos.219/1/A1 and 220/1/A1, situated at Chinna
Gollapally Village (Gollapally Khurd), Shamshabad
Municipality, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It
is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the
said sale deed was presented to the Office of Sub Registrar,
Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District, i.e., respondent No.2.
It is submitted that petitioner obtained information under
the Right to Information Act that sufficient stamp duty
needs to be paid for the registration of the property,
therefore, respondent No.2 refused registration under
Section 72 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short, 'the Act').
JAK, J
It is also submitted that Section 22-A of the Act has also
been referred by respondent No.2 in response to the
application, dated 28.12.2024, in Lr.No.23/SRO/Shmbd/
2024, dated - - 2024 (Ex.P4).
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for
respondents submitted that if petitioner presents the sale
deed by paying sufficient stamp duty, the authorities shall
abide by the directions issued in the judgment in
Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary and Others v. State of
Andhra Pradesh and Others 1 . That respondent No.2
would take an appropriate decision in respect of the
grievance of petitioner.
5. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and
considered the rival submissions.
1 2016 (1) ALT 550 (F.B.)
JAK, J
6. By way of sale deed, dated 26.11.2024, petitioner
purchased a house bearing No.3-294/A/2, PTIN
No.1199131086, admeasuring 1725 Sq. Yards or 1443.51
Sq meters, having plinth area of 200 sq feet, covered by
A.C.C. in survey Nos.219/1/A1 and 220/1/A1, situated at
Chinna Gollapally Village (Gollapally Khurd), Shamshabad
Municipality, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
A photocopy of the said sale deed is annexed to the writ
petition as Ex.P1. It appears that it is not a registered
document.
7. Be that as it may, an application was made by
petitioner on 28.12.2024 to respondent No.2 and
respondent No.2 in reply to the application dated
28.12.2024 issued Lr.No.23/SRO/Shmbd/2024, stating
that registration is refused under Section 72 of the Act,
1908.
JAK, J
8. It is pertinent to note that a Division Bench of this
Court in Invecta Technologies Private Limited and
Others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its
Secretary, Stamps and Registration Department,
Hyderabad and Others 2, while upholding the challenge to
Section 22-A of the Act, held that the authority has to
exercise the power under Section 22-A of the Act in
consonance with the guidelines laid down by the Full Bench
of this Court in Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary's case
(1 supra).
9. Considering the entire factual matrix of the case, this
Court is of the opinion that respondent No.2 be directed to
follow the directions issued in Vinjamuri Rajagopala
Chary's case (1 supra) and also to consider the order
dated 22.03.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.9645 of
2021 and 26353 of 2023, for arriving at a conclusion and
2 2024 (1) ALT 272 (DB) (TS)
JAK, J
thereafter pass appropriate proceedings in accordance with
law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. The said proceedings shall be
communicated to the petitioner.
10. With the above observation, the writ petition is
disposed of. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand
closed.
___________________________
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J
Date: 19.02.2025
Kgk
