Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/18989/2018 of Teliki Raghu Ramulu, Vs Secy., Revenue dept., State of A.P., on 29 January 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX [3459] PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.18989 OF 2018 Between: Teliki Raghu Ramulu and 6 others. --- Petitioners and The State

APHC010412182018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ::

AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

WRIT PETITION No.18989 OF 2018

Between:

Teliki Raghu Ramulu and 6 others.

---

Petitioners

and

The State of Andhra Pradesh,

Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue,

Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District, A.P. and another.

---

Respondents

Counsel for the petitioners

:

Smt. A.V.S. Laxmi

Counsel for the respondents

:

G.P. for Assignment &

G.P. for Revenue

The Court made the following

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER:

The petitioners have entered into various agreements of sale on different dates with the respective extents of lands in Patta No.42 in Sy.No.151/1C, Sarada Nagar Layout, PR No.126/87, Dt.27.10.1987, situated at Vepagunta Village, Pendurthy Mandal, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Gopalapatnam S.R.O Limits, Visakhapatnam District and approached the second respondent for registration of the sale deeds, he refused to register the same, without assigning any reasons. Challenging the same, the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent authorities, without receiving the documents, cannot refuse them for registration. If at all the respondent authorities want to refuse the documents for registration, specific reasons have to be assigned for doing the same.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, submits that consequent to the enactment of the A.P. Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 all the Inam lands were abolished and as such the lands in Survey No.151/C of Vepagunta Village were endowed by Sri Sri Sri Maharaja of Vizianagaram estate in favour of Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimhaswamy Devasthanam, Simhachalam and the same were notified under

Section 22(A)(1)(c) in Annexure-III of the Registration (A.P. Amendment) Act, 2007. The petitioners’ lands fall in the same Survey No.151/1C of Vepagunta Village, Visakhapatnam District and the same is included into the prohibited lands notified under Section 22(A)(1)(c) of the Registration Act.

5. The land in question in Survey No.151/C, Sarada Nagar Layout, Vepagunta Village, has been notified as prohibited under Section 22(A)(1)(c) of the Registration Act. Due to it being an inam land belonging to Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimhaswamy Devasthanam, Simhachalam under the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 the erstwhile High Court at Hyderabad has previously in W.P. No.6343 of 2018 on 26.02.2018 has held that the registration authorities cannot refuse to receive the document, presented for registration and if the second respondent therein believes that such document cannot be registered due to the land being in the prohibited land under Section 22(A)(1)(c) of the Registration Act, they must receive the document and refuse to register it and make an endorsement to that effect passing a speaking order in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act.

6. While the petitioners argue that they hold valid agreements, the Revenue Authorities cannot treat the subject land as Devasthanam property leading to registration refusal. Earlier, this Court in W.P. No.6343 of 2018 has directed the respondent authorities to process the document under Section 22(A) of the

Registration Act and if refuse to pass a formal order under Section 71 of the Registration Act, allowing party to seek further recourse.

7. In view of the same, the second respondent is directed to receive the documents for registration, verify the status and pass a reasoned order under Section 71 of the Registration Act, if they intend to register due to the land falling in Survey No.151/C of Vepagunta Village.

8. Accordingly, with the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed. No order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 30.01.2026 DSH

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead