Telangana High Court
WP/25255/2004 of Sri C. Rami Reddy, Vs The District Collector-Ranga Reddy District at Saifabad, on 31 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 25255 of 2004 Between: Sri C.Rami Reddy, S/o Sri Sanjeeva Reddy, Retired Employee,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 25255 of 2004
Between:
Sri C.Rami Reddy, S/o Sri Sanjeeva Reddy, Retired Employee, Resident of Plot No.567,Vivekananda Nagar Colony, Near Kukatpally, Hyderabad.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1. The District Collector-Ranga Reddy District at Saifabad, Hyderabad.
2. The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District.
3. The Sub-Registrar, Medchal, Ranga Reddy District.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamuscalling for the record from the 1[st] respondent herein relating to circular instructionsR.C.No.E2/406/2001, dated 06.02.2001 and declare the same as illegal, arbitraryand violative of Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and Ultravires of theRegistration Act and consequently direct the 2[nd] and 3[rd] respondents herein toregister the sale deeds in respect of the petitioner’s land bearing Plot No. P-18admeasuring 200 Sq.yards or 167.5 Sq.Metres situated at MahadevapuramResidential Project out of Ac.18.27 Guntas of land situated in Survey Nos.329/9 and 329/7 (part), Gajularamaram Village, Qutbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District infavour of the prospective purchasers.For the Petitioner: MR.N.CHANDRADHAR RAO, AdvocateFor the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court at the stage of admission made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner claims to be owner of the land bearing Plot No.P-18 admeasuring 200square yards situated at Mahadevapuram Residential Project in Survey Nos.329/9and 329/7(part) of Gajularamaram Village, Quitbullapur Mandal, RangareddyDistrict. He intends to sell the said land to prospective purchasers. It is stated thatwhen he had approached respondent Nos.2 and 3 for the purpose of registration ofthe land in favour of prospective purchasers, they refused to register the sale deeddue to the circular instructions issued by the first respondent in Proc.No.R.C.No.E2/406/2001, dated 06-02-2001. Assailing the impugned circular of the firstrespondent and consequently seeking a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 toregister the sale deed in respect of the land in question, the petitioner filed thepresent writ petition.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and admitted to by thelearned Government Pleader for Revenue that the subject matter of this writ petitionis squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in W.P. No.1953 of 2002, dated 11-12-2003. In the circumstances, following the said judgment, this writ petition isdisposed of in the following terms.
In the impugned circular, the Joint Collector took exception to the issuance of noobjection certificate by the Mandal Revenue Officers and he ultimately directed theMandal Revenue Officers not to issue any no objection certificate for registrationpurpose or otherwise in respect of lands in the district without prior approval of theDistrict Collector. A direction was also issued to all the Sub-Registrars not toentertain any documents for registration of lands in the district without prior approvalor in the absence of no objection certificate from the District Collector. In a way thecircular brings all the transactions in respect of lands in the district to halt. For suchan exercise, the respondents must have specific power under any relevant statute.The circular has no reference to any provision of law under which it is issued.
Conclusion
As long as any person holds title to the property, the respondents do not have anypower or jurisdiction to prevent the same from being transferred. It is not as if there isno provision of law to protect the properties of the Government. In case, anyindividual is found to be in possession of government land, the Andhra PradeshLand Encroachment Act enables the revenue authorities to evict the persons in unauthorized occupation. Similarly, proceedings can be initiated under theprovisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act where a person isfound to be in possession of government land without legal entitlement. The JointCollector has chosen the course of action, which is not permissible in law.
The Registration Act does contain a provision enabling the government to prohibittransfer in respect of any lands. Such prohibition, however, is to be imposed byissuing a notification under Section 22(A) of the Registration Act, 1908. TheGovernment has not chosen to issue a notification under that provision in respect ofland held by the petitioner. Viewed from any angle, this Court does not find anybasis for the impugned circular. The Division Bench of this Court in its judgmentdated 10-09-2001 in W.A. No.1390 of 2001 took exception to such an exercise.
For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is setaside. Any document presented by the petitioner or any persons claiming throughhim in respect of the land in question shall be processed and dealt with as per theprovisions of the Indian Stamp Act and the Registration Act.
______________
N.V. RAMANA, J
Date: 31-12-2004
Svv
That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above.
Witness the Hon’ble Sri Devinder Gupta, the Chief Justice on this Friday, the ThirtyFirst day of December, Two thousand and Four.
1. The District Collector-Ranga Reddy District at Saifabad, Hyderabad.
2. The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District.
3. The Sub-Registrar, Medchal, Ranga Reddy District.
4. Two C.Cs to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, A.P.,Hyderabad (OUT).
5. Two C.D.copies.