WP/24824/2020 of Smt. Moka Bhagya Lakshmi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2020

Arguments

ORDER

Writ Petition No.24824 of 2020

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the 3[rd] respondent in registering the document vide P.No.36 of 2015, without assigning any reasons as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 [‘the Act’, for short] and consequently direct the 3[rd] respondent to forthwith register and release the above pending document.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Registration and Stamps appearing for the respondents.

The case of the petitioner is that she purchased agricultural land admeasuring Ac.0.50 cents situated in Sy.No.72/2 of Dharmavaram Village, Anantapuramu District, for valuable sale consideration from its lawful owners – S.Ramanjaneyulu and S. Kondappa and presented the sale deed before the 3[rd] respondent for registration. The 3[rd] respondent has issued market value certificate dated 02.05.2014 and demanded the petitioner to pay the stamp duty on the revised market value, which was increased by five times. Questioning the market value certificate, the petitioner filed W.P.No.15358 of 2014. In the said writ petition, by interim order dated 05.6.2014, passed in WPMP.No.19024 of 2014, this Court suspended the market value certificate dated 02.05.2014 pending disposal of the writ petition. Therefore, the petitioner approached the 3[rd]respondent for registration of the sale deed as per the earlier market value. The 3[rd] respondent received the sale deed and assigned pending document number vide P.No.36 of 2015. As the 3[rd] respondent is not processing the document for registration and kept pending without assigning any reasons, the petitioner filed W.P.No.21617 of 2016. The writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 08.08.2016 directing the 3[rd]respondent therein to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as to why the document is kept pending and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. But till date the 3[rd] respondent has not chosen to register and release the sale deed presented by the petitioner nor returned the same by passing appropriate orders as per the provision of Section 71 of the Act. Hence, the present writ petition came to be filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that G.O.Ms.No.757 dated 18.12.2001 was issued by the Government notifying the fee rates for registration of the documents. The Government again issued G.O.Ms.No.157 dated 30.03.2013 granting permission to the Commissioner & Inspector General of Registration and Stamps to revise the market value in urban and rural areas in the State from 01.04.2013 by relaxing Rue 5 of A.P.Revision of Market Value Guidelines Rules, 1998. The said G.O was questioned by filing P.I.L.No.274 of 2013. By orders passed in the PIL, the GO was set aside. The orders passed in PIL.No.274 of 2013, amply applies to the case of the petitioners and the 3[rd] respondent is bound to register and release the pending document. However, if there is any objection for registration of the document, the 3[rd] respondent is under statutory obligation to return the document duly endorsing the reasons for non-registration of the document as per the provision of Section 71 of the Act.

Therefore, if a direction is given to the 3[rd] respondent to process the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration vide P.No.36 of 2015, as envisaged under the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader endorses the said submission.

Conclusion

In the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the counsel for both the sides and on perusal of the record, this Court found that the action of the 3[rd] respondent in keeping the document vide P.No.36 of 2015 without registering and releasing the same, inspite of orders passed in WP.No.21617 of 2016, dated 08.08.2016, is illegal. The 3[rd]respondent, after receiving the document and assigning pending document number, is under statutory obligation to process the same for registration and register the document if it is otherwise in order or he has to pass a reasoned order under the provision of Section 71 of the Act giving reasons for not registering the document.

For the reasons stated above, this Court felt it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 3[rd]respondent to process the pending document vide P.No.36 of 2015, for registration, and register it if it is otherwise in order as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, and release the same to the petitioner in accordance with law. In the event he is not inclined to register the said document and intends to refuse to register the said document, he shall pass appropriate orders as per the provision of Section 71 of the Act giving reasons for not registering the document and communicate the same to the petitioner. The entire exercise as indicated above shall be completed as expeditiously as possible but not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

31.12.2020 Vjl

_________________

M.GANGA RAO, J

Vjl

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO

WRIT PETITION No. 24824 of 2020 31.12.2020