WP/38944/2013 of Saroja Lakshmi, W/o. A. Sunkanna, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2013

ORDER:

Petitioners aver that the land admeasuring Ac. 0.62 cents,in Sy.No.121-2, situated at Anantapur Rural Mandal, AnantapurDistrict is a patta land. The said land was originally succeededby Smt. R. Shakuntalamma from her husband D.R. Rajagopal. The petitioners, who are the legal heirs of said Shakuntalamma,have succeeded to the said property. The petitionersapproached the 3[rd] respondent with a request to register thePartition Deed, but the same is not received by the 3[rd]respondent on the ground that the document does not containNo Objection Certificate from the revenue authorities. In thecircumstances, petitioners instituted this writ petitionchallenging the action of the 3[rd] respondent in not receiving theDeed of Partition.

2. The grievance of the petitioners is with regard to theinsistence by the registering authorities on production of ‘NoObjection Certificate’ (NOC) from the Revenue Authorities as acondition precedent for receiving and registering the documentpresented by them for registration in connection with immovableproperty.

3. This Court has time and again held that there is no legalsanction for the action of the Registration Authorities in insistingupon such certification from the Revenue Authorities beforeentertaining documents for registration. Further, theGovernment of Andhra Pradesh issued MemoNo.49938/Regn.I/A1/2012-4, dated 06.12.2012, requesting theCommissioner and Inspector General of Registration andStamps, Andhra Pradesh, to instruct all the Registering Officersin the State not to ask for NOCs from the Revenue Authoritiesbefore registration and not to act on any such NOCs.

4. On similar issue, batch of writ petitions were disposed ofby this Court by an order, dated 28.06.2013. Aggrieved by theorder in W.P.No.12376 of 2013, dated 24.04.2013, the DistrictCollector, Chittoor District, filed Writ Appeal No.1653 of 2013. The Division Bench of this Court affirmed the decision of thelearned Single Judge. The Division Bench issued the followingdirections:

“Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and order of thelearned Single Judge. We direct henceforth that noGovernment official shall act or take action in any mannerunless that official concerned is authorized by law. Accordingly, the No Objection Certificate which hashitherto been asked for registration of the document shallnot be demanded any more unless it is authorized by anappropriate enactment with prospective effect and notretrospective effect.

We feel that this judgment has got tremendous publicimportance. Therefore, a copy of this judgment shall becirculated to all the District Registrars, who in turn, shallissue instructions to their officers concerned under hiscontrol.”

5. It is unfortunate that the Registering Authorities continueto insist upon No Objection Certification from the RevenueAuthorities before receiving the documents pertaining toimmovable properties.

6. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the

Sub-Registrar, Anantapur, Anantapur District (3[rd] respondent),to receive and process the document presented by thepetitioners without insisting upon such NOC and in the event thedocument presented fulfils the requirements of the RegistrationAct, 1908, and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, he shall register andrelease the document in accordance with the due procedure. If,however the 3[rd] respondent is of the opinion that the documentpresented for registration warrants denial, he shall pass ordersin writing indicating the reasons for such refusal andcommunicate the same to the party in accordance with Section71 of the Registration Act, 1908. There shall be no order as tocosts. Miscellaneous petition, if any, pending in this writpetition, shall stand closed.

_________________

P.NAVEEN RAO, J

Date: 31[st] December, 2013

KL

KL

WRIT PETITION No.38944 of 2013

Date: 31[st] December, 2013