[\Irs.Mounika Burugupalli v. REGISTRATION

Order

This rvrit petition is filed seeking the following relief: alleged notification proceedings "...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent bearing No.18L69lGLl2019 dated 16.06.2020 on the basis of File No.E5/4733 I 2Ol 3/ Serilingampally/Gopanpally, dated 26.09.2O13 issued by the District Collector, contrary to the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 25.08.2014 in WP.No.19069 of 2OL4 by con{irming the rejection ordgr of the third respondent bearing No.l27 of 2OL9 dated 2L.lL.2Ol9 refusing registration in a selective manner on the basis of tl're alleged letter bearing No.B /32212OO7 , dated 08.09.2O 1 1 issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in respect of the sale deed dated 05.1O.2O19 executed in favour of the petitioner herein vide pending Document No.730 ol2019 for Plot Nos.17 admeasuring 200 sq. yards in Sy.No.36lA l20 (Sub-Division No.15 of Survey No.36), situated at Block No.l (presently known as Pattabhi Nagar) Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, lRangareddy District as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 30O-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents forthwith to receive and register the Gift Deed dated 05.10.2019, bearing Pending Document No.730 of 2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders..." \ \

2' H':ard Mr. y.pandarinath Goud, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. D.Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Govern:nent pleader for stamps and Registration appearing for respondents

3. Lr:arned counsel for petitioner submitted that the subject matter in the present writ petition is identical to the subject matter in w.p.No.4475 of 2o2r & batch, that by common order dated 06.10.2025, this court allowed the writ petitior-s. Hence, similar orders be passed in this writ petitior..

4. F':r reasons arike, as stated in the common order, dated 06.1o.ito2\, in w.p.No.4475 of 2o2r & batch and .in terms thereof, the writ petition is allowe d. ,,qtta,, the writ petitioner, "qud'tJre prayer. No order as to costs. iVliscelaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ Petitiorr shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has been made absotute as above. WiINESS T}{E HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH, ON this TUESDAY, TIIE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE //TRUE COPY// SD/- A. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The.Special chief s_ecretary, Revenue (Registration a.nd stamps)Department, D-Blocl<, 4th Floor, Telangana secretariat, Fita;rabro'- sooozz. li.

2. The District Registrar, Moosapet, Prashanth Nagar, IDA Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Rangareddy District. Tela ngan a-50007 2.

3. The Sub-Registrar, Serilingampally, H.NO.1-6013O176n34! 1-q0/.3O1771134 Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Rangareddy District, Telangana- 500081.

4. One CC to SRI Y. PANDARINATH GOUD, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad . [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies (Along with a copy of Common Order, dated. 06.10.2025 in W.P No.4475 of 2021 & batch) PMK GJPN t, .,. . &:.-, HIGH COIJRT D ATED i0'711012025 ORDER WP.No.3264 of 2021 o(J \ t ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOI.'T COSTS efr,r" 3 b{E 5 10 ,rtAR 2026

4. I ,- a'- ^rt, -\i:.. _. " * THEHON'BLESHRIJUSTICEANILKUMARJUKANTI N 5 1

6781. 8331 and 88OO of 2O21 ORD w.p.No.4475 of 2O2L is filed with the following prayer: "... to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No'576/G I l2O2O dated 16l06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.85 of 2OL9 dated tg/LLl2Ol9, in respect of the Plot No'65 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 11, situated at Gopanpally Village' Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26l09l2Ol3 in File No.E5/47 33 I 2ol3/Serilin gallrrpally /Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District collector and the letter bearing No.Bl322/2OO7, dated OSlOgl2OlL stated to have been issued by the Tahsitdar and Deputy Collector' Serilingampalty Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegaI, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated rcjOz1Zo19, bearing Pending Document No' P455/19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass"'" w.p.No.448O of 2o2I is filed with the following 2 prayer: t 2 _ JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch '...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction nlore particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18 t93lGt /2otg 1710612020 confirming the Order of the Third Flespondent in Proceedings bearing No.99 of 2O19 dated |9/IL/2O19, in respect of the plot No.303 in Survey llos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Sierilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09l2Ot3 in File l{o.85 /4733 /2O 13/Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to trave been issued by the District collector and the retter trearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8lO9/2OLL stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deput5r Collector, Iierilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers Iiom jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articlesl4 and 300-A of l.he Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of iiale-Cum-Irrevocable General power of Attorney daied '25 / 07 12019, bearing Pending Document No.p5O4/2019 r:xecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass...,, V/.P.No.4494 of 2O2l is filed with the following 3 prayer: ''...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.586/G L l2O2O dated 16l06/2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.199 of 2019 dated 2L/1L/2OL9, in respect of the plot No.42 in Survey Nos.36/4A/7, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated. 26109/2013 in File No. E5/47 33 / 20 L3 / Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OOZ, dated O8/Og/2Ott stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deput5r collector, 3 W.P.No.4475 of 202t"'*[i Serilingampatly Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 16/ 09 /2o19,bearing Pending Document No. P667l2O19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.P.No.45O2 of 2O2l is filed with the following 4 prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.1837/Gl/2019 dated 16.06.2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Refusal Proceedings bearing No' 104 of 2OLg dated L9/Lll2019, in respect of the Plot No-181 in Survey Nos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/Og/2013 in file No.E5/4733 I 2Ol3 lserilingampaily/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated O8lOgl2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articlesl4 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated OglOSl2OLg, bearing Pending Document No'P576 of 2OLg executed in favour of the petitioner and pass"'" W.P.No.4542 of 2O2t is filed with the following 5 prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus \- 4 . JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch dr:claring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18186 lGL l2Ol9 dated l'7 /0612020 confirming the Order of the Third R,:spondent in Proceedings bearing No.97 of 2019 dated in respect of the Plot No.186 in Survey l9llll2}l9, Nos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09 /2013 in File No.E5/4733 I 2ol3lSerilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated O8lO9/20ll stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, S,erilingampally Mandal, is a selective manner as being i.legal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of rratural justice mod violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated t|51O7/2OL9, bearing Pending Document No.PSOO of t2OL9 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." 6. SI.P.No.5072 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer: ''...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18185/GL l2O2O dated 17l06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.1O0 of 2019 dated I9llll20lg in respect of the Plot No.161 in Survey Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 2610912013 in File No. ES I 4733 /2O13/Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated OSlOgl2OLl stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of /,.") 5 W.P.No.4475 of 202ta'ffi{ natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 27lOT l2O19, bearing Pending Document No.P526/ 19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.P.No.3681 of 2O2l is filed with the following 7 prayer: File '...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18183/G1 /2OL9 dated L7lO6l2O2O acting on the alleged notification dated 26.O9.2OL3 in No.E5/473312Or3 Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector, conftrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Refusal No.76 of 2019 dated 19lLll2ol9, acting on the alleged letter bearing No.Bl322l2OO7, dated OBIO9/2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in respect of the Plot No.287 in Survey Nos.36/AAl8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, refusing to register the Agreement of Sale-Cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 03lOT l2O19, bearing Pending Document No.433 of 2OL9 in a selective manner and contrary to the law laid down by this Honourable Court in W.P.No.19O69 of 2014 as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14 and 3O0A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of Sale-Cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 03lOTl2019 bearing Pending Document No.433 of 2OL9 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.P.No.3998 of 2O2L is filed with the following 8 prayer: 6 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch ".. to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in prcceedings bearing No.18189/G1 l2ol9 l-r /06/2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Rr:spondent in Proceedings bearing No.82 of 2019 dated lc-tllll2olg in respect of the Plot No.73 in Survey Nos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, St:rilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26l09l2Ol3 in File N,r.ES/a7X I 2o13/Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to hilve been issued by the District Collector and the letter b':aring No.Bl322/2OO7, dated OSlOgl2OlL stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deput5l Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being iltegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law suffers fi'om jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3O0-A of tee Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of Siale-Cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney datbd Ct4lO7l2Ol9, bearing Pending Document No.P442 of il}Lg executed in favour of the petitioner and pass ..." '*'.P.No.5O8O of 2O2l is filed with the following 9 prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Ceclaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.58 1 /GL I 2O2O dated 16l06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.1O2 of 2Ol9 dated in respect of the Plot No.128 in Survey l9llll2}l9, Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26l09l2ol3 in File No.E5/47 33 I 2Ol3 /serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated OBIO9/2OLL stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deput5r Collector, JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 30O-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 07 /O8/2019, bearing Pending Document No.P565/19 executed in favour of the petitioners and pass..."

10. W.P.No.5091 of 2O2t is liled with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.572/GL /2020 16l06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.75 of 2019 dated 19.11.2OL9, in respect of tJ e Plot No.133 in Survey Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2013 in File No.E5/4733 I 20 1 3/ Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrar5r, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 27 /06/2019, bearing Pending Document No.P4I6/ 19 executed in favour of the petitioners and pass..."

11. W.P.No.5118 of 2O2L is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus 8 w. P.No.4475 of 202 r"'*i;il dt:claring that the order the Second Respondent in p::oceedings bearing No.905/Gl l2O2O dated It5/06/2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.84 of 2019 dated l)/1ll2ol9, in respect of the Plot No.140 in Survey Nos.36/AA/6,situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on tlre alleged notification dated 26/09l2Ol3 in File It o.ES / 47 33 / 20l3lSerilingampally /Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter Learing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8/O9/2Oll stated to frave been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Sierilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being i[egal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 06l07 /2019, bearing Pending Document No.P446/19 r:xecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

12. V/.P.No.5145 of 2O2l is filed with the foilowing prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.571 lcl /2O2O dated 16/06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.74 of 2Ol9 dated l9/lll20l9, in respect of the PIot No.131 in Survey Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09 /2OL3 in File No. E5/ 47 33 / 20 I 3/ Serilin garnpally / Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8/O9|2OLL stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deput5r Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of 9 w.P.No.4475 of 202 r&t"[{ natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 27 106/2019, bearing Pending Document No.P415/19 executed in favour of the petitioners and pass..."

13. W.P.No.5399 of 2O2L is filed with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18201IGI l2OI9 dated 17.06.2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.130 of 2019 dated 2l.Il.2OL9, in respect of the Plot No.111 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 11, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2013 in File No.E5/47 33 / 2OL3 /serilingam pal\y / Gopanpally, said io have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrarSr to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 25.10.2019, bearing Pending Document No.P756/2O19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.P.No.5415 of 2O2l is filed with the following t4 prayer: *...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18190lGLl2OL9 dated L7.06.2020 confirming the Order of the Third r0 w.P.No.4475 of 2o2t&t"ti Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.11O of 2O19 dated 19.11.2019, in respect of the Plot No.28 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2OI3 in Fite No.E5/4733 / 2O13/ Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.Bl322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, S,erilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being iJlegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers f:om jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of rratural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated ) 1.O9.2O19, bearing Pending Document No.P646/2O19 r:xecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

15. \['.P.No.5420 of 2O2I is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction rnore particularly one in the nature cf Writ of Mandamus ,leclaring that the order of the Second Respondent in croceedings bearing No.580/G L / 2O2O dated 16.06.2020 :onfirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No. 1O I of 20 19 dated 19.1 I .2019, in respect of the PIot No.305 in Survey Nos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification File No.E5/4733 / 2O13lSerilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2007, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the SaIe Deed dated

26.09.2013 "r W.P.No.4475 of 202t"'fi

27.o7 -2019, bearing pending Document No.ps2z /2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass...,, w.P.No.5429 of 2o2L is filed with the following 16 prayer: ....to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.1g35/G r /2o2o dated 16/06/2020 confirming the order of the Third Respondent in proceedings bearing r32 of 2oLg dated 2r/1r12o19, in respect of the plot No.llo in survey Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/og/2or3 in File No .Es / 4733120l3lserilingampally/Gopanpafly, said to have been issued by the District collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2ooz, dated o8/og/2ort stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deput5r collector, serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3oo_A of the constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the sale Deed dated 28/to/2o19, bearing pending Document No. p763/2olg executed in favour of the petitioner and pass...,, tr. w.P.No.5435 of 2o2L is filed with the following prayet: ".-.to issue as an appropriate writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.1g2OO/ Gl /2}tg 17l06/2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.117 of 2or9 dated l9lll/2o19, in respect of the plot No.257 in Survey 361 AAI 77, situated at Gopanpally Village, t2 w.P.No.4475 of 202r"'fii;i S;erilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09l2OI3 in File llo .85 / 47 33 I 20 1 3 / Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter trearing No.B/32212OO7, dated OS|O9|2OLI stated to treen issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, fierilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers Iiom jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of rratural justice and violative of Articles14 and 300-A of t:he Constitution of India and further direct the ::espondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 16/0912019, bearing Pending Document No. P665/2OI9 :xecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

18. V/.P.No.5436 of 2021 is filed with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No. 18199 /GL /2OI9 dated 17.06.2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.116 of 20 19 dated 19.11.2019, in respect of the Plot No.268 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 1 1, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2OL3 in File No.E5/4733 I 2Ol3 /Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.20ii stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitraqr, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated L6.O9-2OL9, bearing Pending Document No.p664 /2O19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." 13 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch

19.W.P.No.5926of2o2|isfiledwiththefollowing prayer '... to issue a an appropriate Writ' Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceeding" bearing No'18177/ Gll2}lg 17106l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No'73 of 2Ol9 dated toittlzoto, in respect of the Plot No'80 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village' Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District' acting on the alleged notification dated 26lOg l2Ol3 in File No.E5/47 33 I 2o13/Serilingampally/Gopanpally' said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.Bl322fzooz, dated oSlogl2oll stated to have been issued by the Tahsild,ar and Deputy collector' Serilingampa[y Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory' contrary to law' suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3OO-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 2l I 06 I 2019, bearing Pending Document No'P38a/2O19 executedinfavourofthepetitionerandpass"'" W.P.No.6234 of 2O2l is filed with the following 20 prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ' Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in fro"."ai-rg. bearing No'574/G L l2o2o the Order of the Third 16l06l2O2O "o.,fi'*iig Respondent in Proceedinls bearing No'81 of 2OL9 dated lgllll2}Lg, in respect of the Plot No'77 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 11, situated at Gopanpally Village' Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District' acting on the alleged notification dated 26l09l2OL3 in File 14 w.P.No.4475 of 2021"'*f;i No.E,5 / 4733 I 2Ol3 /serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District collector and the letter bearingNo.B/322l2OO7,datedOA|O9l2}llstatedto have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illeg:rl, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natu.ral justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3oo-A of the constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of sale-cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 04/)7 /2019, bearing Pending Document No' P441 /2019 exe<:uted in favour of the petitioner and pass "'" W.P No. 6238 of 2O2l is filed with the following 2l prayer "... to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus dec:laring that the order of the second Respondent in' prc,ceedings bearing No.18L87lGll2Ol9 dated L7 |06/2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respond.ent in Proceedings bearing No. 1 1 | of 20 19 dated Lglll/2olg, in respect of the Plot No.188 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on th,: alleged notification dated 26-09-2OI3 in File Nc'.E5/47 33 I 2Ol3 lserilingampally/Gopanpally, said to he.ve been issued by the District collector and the letter bearing No. B/322/2OO7, dated O8lO9l2O11 stated to hzrve been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, St:rilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers frcm jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of n;etural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3OO-A of ttre Constitution of India and further direct the rr:spondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 11 log /2019, bearing Pending Document No.P647 /2019 erecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass .'." l5 w.P.No.4475 of 202 t"'*f;i

22. W.P.No.5441 of 2O2l is fiIed with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.1836/G I l2O2O dated 16/06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.113 of 20 19 dated L9|LL|2OI9, in respect of the PIot No-58 in Survey No.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26l09l2Ol3 in File No.E5/47 33 /2013 /serilingampalty/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8/O9l2OlI stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being iflegal, arbitrar5r, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3OO-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 2L I 08 /2019, bearing Pending Document No.P659/2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass-.."

23. W.P.No.5446 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.587/G I I 2O2O dated 16-06.2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.12O of 2Ol9 dated 21.11-20 19, in respect of the Plot No.38 in Survey Nos.36/AA/7, situated at Gopanpally Village, Seritingampally Mandal; Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification FiLe

26.O9.2Ot3 t6 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch \to.ES / 473312OI3 /Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2011 stated to trave been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, $erilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being iLlegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 123.O9.2079, bearing Pending Document No. P689/2OL9 r:xecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass ..."

24. t[I.P.No.6771 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction .rore particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus leclaring that the order of the Second Respondent'in proceedings bearing No.18 L78lGt l2ot9 1710612020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.87 of 2O19 dated l9lLll2o19, in respect of the Plot No.l82 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26lOg l2Ot3 in File No. E5/4733 I 20 13 / Serilingampally / Gopanpatly, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8lO9/2OII stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of SaIe cum lrrevocable General Power of Attorney dated lLlO7/2019, bearing Pending Document No. p459/2OLg executed in favour of the petitioner and pass...,, t7 w.P.No.4475 of 202t..I*td

25. W.P.No.6772 of 2O2L is filed with the following prayet '...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.592/G I / 2O2O dated L6.O6.2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearingNo.152 of 2OL9 dated O9.|2.2OL9,in respect of the Plot No.362 in Survey Nos.36/AA/11, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2013 in File No.E5/473312Ot3/ SerilingampalLyl Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.L3/32212OO7, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffeis from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the SaIe Deed dated 06.11 .2OL9, bearing Pending Document No.P777 l2Ot9 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

26. W.P.No.6779 of 2021 is filed with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.593/Gl /2O2O dated L6/06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.154 of 2019 dated O9lL2l2OL9, in respect of the Plot No.98 in Surwey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notilication dated 26109/2013 in File t8 W.P.No.4475 of 2021"'*:i l{o.ES / 4733 I 2O13l Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter trearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8|O9/2OLL stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, fierilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers liom jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of t.he Constitution of India and further direct the ::espondents to receive and register the SaIe Deed dated L9/1112019, bearing Pending Document No. p78T /2OL9 ,lxecuted in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

27. V/.P.No.6781 of 2O2L is liled with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.9352/G L /2OL9 dated 17106l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing Refusal No.40 of 2OI9 dated 20/O5/2O19, in respect of the plot No.g2 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09l2Ot3 in File No. E5 / 47 33 I 20 13 I Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated OBlOgl2Ott stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sate Deed dated 20/O5/2O19, bearing Pending Document No. p3O1 /2otg executed in favour of the petitioner and pass...,, ,, ,s '': t

1.' ./ t9 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch

28. w.P-No.8331 of 2021 is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.14009/ Gl /2}tg OS|OT |ZO2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in proceedings bearing Refusal No.34 of 2ol9 dated 02/os/2019, in respect of the plot No.5r in Survey Nos.36/AA/11, situated at Gopanpally Village, serilingampally Mandar, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2013 in File No. E5/473312013/Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO2, dated OS.O9.2Ot1 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy collector, serilingampally Mandal, in a selective marner as being illegal, arbitrar5r, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the sale Deed dated 02 / OS I 2019, bearing pending Document NoP262 / 2Ot9 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass...',

29. w.P-No.8800 of 2o2t is filed with the following prayer: '...to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing to register the sale Deed pending document No.878 of 2O2O submitted by the petitioner for registration with regard to the plot bearing No.3 Part admeasuring244.44 sqyards in Shilpa Poineer Block-I in Sy.Nos.37 of Gachibowli village, Serilingampally Mandal, RR District vide refusal order No.2I7 of 2O2O dt.LT I L2l2O2O as highly illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same and consequently direct the 3.a 20 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch rr:spondent to receive, register and release the SaIe Deed P:nding Document No.878 of 2O2O submitted by the petitioner for registration with regard to the Plot bearing No.3 Part admeasuring244.44 sq yards in Shilpa Poineer Elock-I, in Sy.Nos.37 of Gachibowli village, Serilingampally Mandal, RR District without reference to flre proceedings of the District Collector dt.26.O9.2013 and pass ..."

30. Heard Mr. B.Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel for petitioners and Ms. Dara Haritha Kiran learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents.

31. The subject matter in all the Writ Petitions pertains to Plotr; in various Sub-divisions of Survey No.36 situated at Gorranpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, 'Ranga Reddy District. For reference, facts in W.P.No.36Bt of 2O2l are being considered (Serial No.7 in the batch of writ petitio:es).

32. It is the grievance of petitioner that respondents are refusing to receive and register the Agreement of Sale-cum- Irrevor:able General Power of Attorney dated O3.O7.2OL9 bearing document No.433 of 2019 in respect of Plot No.287 in Sy.No.36/AA/8 (Sub Division No.8 of Sy.No.36) situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddl'District. It is submitted that the document has been 2l JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch kept pending on the file of Sub Registrar on the ground that a notification dated 26.09.2013 in File No.E5/4733 / 2)l3/Serilingampally/Gopanpally issued by District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322l2OOT dated 08.09.2011 of the Tahsildar. It is further submitted that Sub-Registrar, Serilingampally, refused the registration of document that the scheduled property is prohibited as per the list furnished by Tahsildar, classified as Poramboke.

33. Attention is invited to Ex.P3 a letter addressed to the Sub-Registrar by Tahsildar.

34. It is submitted that order of refusal of Sub-Registrar was carried by way of an appeal before the District Registrar and the District Registrar vide proceedings dated L7.06.2020 (Ex.Pl) refused registration of the deed on the premise that property in Sy.No.36/AAIB was included in the prohibited property list vide notification in File No.E5/4733/2O13/Serilingampally/Gopanpally, dated

26.09.2013, issued by District Collector, Ranga Reddy District and as such the propert5r could not be registered. 22 w.P.No.4475 of 202t"'*f;i \'

35. It is submitted that notification relied upon by the Registrar in his order dated 17.06.2020 is in parimateria to the not:ification which was the subject matter of challenge before this court and that this court in w.p.No.19069 of 2ol4 [,y its order dated 25.08.2014 had directed the sub- Registrar to receive and process the deeds of conveyance subject to the condition that sub-Registrar was at liberty to refuse to register the deeds by duly assigning reasons. Placinll reliance upon the judgment of the learned Single Judge. it is contended that the said notification annexed at Page llo.26 being in parimateria to that of the notification under challenge in the W.P.No.19069 of 2OL4, the notification dated 26.09.2013 has to receive the same fate.

36. I.earned counsel invited the attention of this court to the document annexed to the counter affidavit filed and submitted that the list communicated by the District collector to commissioner & Inspector General vide letter No.El 1447812024, dated 07.04.2025, is a subsequent list and tiee same cannot be relied upon, as the order of the Registrar and the sub-Registrar are based on different 23 W.P.No.4475 of 202 t..Iffii notification (earlier dated) and letter of rahsildar. It is submitted that by letter dated o2.o4.2o25, properties are added to and a revised list of immovable properties is issued and the said survey number finds place in the said list. It is further submitted that reliance placed on a list dated O7.O4.2O25 is misconceived and is not valid in the eye of law as the rejection orders of both the Sub-Registrar and that of Registrar are based on different lists and the letter dated 07.o4.2o25 cannot have a retrospective effect.

37. Placing reliance on the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in Commissioner of Police, Bombag a. Gordhandq.s Bhanjit, it is contended that orders once made, the purport of the order and content cannot be improvised and has to be read and understood on the contents of the order itself. It is further contended that any improvement made by way of counter affidavit or submissions cannot be added to change the purport of the order.

38. Basing on the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court, it is contended that notification dated 26.09.2013 of rRtR tgsz sc to 24 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch ,$\ the offrr:e of District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, fell for conside,ration before this Court and learned Single Judge of this Ccurt by order dated 25.08.2014 in W.P.No.19O69 of 2014 directed the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the deeds cf conveyance without reference to the Notification dated 116.09.2013.

39. 11- is submitted that as the subject matter i.e., plots in variour; subdivided survey number(s) of Sy.No.36 are parcek; of land in this batch of writ petitions which pertain to the notification, this Court may consider the order of learne,l Single Judge, unless different set of facts are borne out of record.

40. It is submitted by learned counsel that as the facts are similar in nature, same order as in W.P.No. 19069 of 2Ol4 be passed.

41. ,f,n the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleadt:r for respondents submitted that on the basis of a communication received, Tahsildar addressed a letter to Sub-Flegistrar, letter dated September, 2071, that certain 25 w.P.No.4475 of 2021"'*[J properties in Serilingampally Mandal and the subject property of the writ petitioner was reflected as Government land(s) in the Khasra Pahani, hence prohibited from being registered. It is further submitted that District Registrar on appeal confirmed the order of the Sub-Registrar on the basis of notification dated 26.09.2013 issued by the office of District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. That the properties in Sy.No.36/AA one in the prohibited list.

42. It is submitted that District Registrar has not erred in rejecting the documents and as such refusal to receive and register the documents presented by the petitioners in the writ petitions are in accordance with law.

43. Learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Honble Apex Court in Mohinder singh Gill qnd another u. The Chief Dlection Commissiotter, Neut Delhi and others2, invited the attention of this Court to Paragraph No.S of the judgment, wherein the observations of Honble Justice Bose in Commissioner of Police, Bonbag a. Gordhorndols Bhanji (l supra) were extracted, on the basis '(tszg) I scc4o5 26 w.P.No.4475 or zo2t"'*fJi of the rontents, it was contended that notification of the office c,f Collector have to be construed on the basis of langua;3e used therein.

44. It is submitted that pursuant to Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short the Act) various notificertions were issued across the State by the offices of District collectors. That one such notification issued by the office of District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, is dated

26.09.'.2013. It is further submitted that on the information and deLta collected/gathered at the ground level, properties in various survey numbers have been included in the notificrrtion and the notification came to be issued on 26.09.2073. It is also submitted that Collector is empov/ered to issue notification under section 22-A of the Act.

45. It is submitted that upon the exercise of powers under section 22-A of the Act, lands are included or listed under any of the sub-sections of section 22-A(1)(a-e) of the Act. It is further submitted that lands in which the state Government has "avowed" or "accrued" interest can also be -) w.P.No.4475 of 2021"'fiti 27 included/listed in the notification under Section 22-A of the Act, that the notifications are issued to protect the properties from being claimed as private properties, etc,. It is submitted that the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No. L9O69 of 20 14 is pertains to set of lands situated in Haleezpet and the order may not be extended to other areas, as the order is very specific to particular parcels of land. It is further contended that on O7.O4.2O25, the said parcels of land in various subdivided survey numbers of Sy.No.36 in Gopanpally Village have been notified. It is also contended that the respondents be given liberty to proceed in accordance with law as the said plots in survey numbers have been included in the notification dated 07.O4.2O25 of the office of District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.

46. Heard learned counsels, perused the record, considered the submissions.

47. In all these writ petitions, petitioners are purchasers of various plots in the main Survey No.36 of Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is the specific case of all the petitioners that they presented 28 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch sale iLeeds, development agreements, gift deeds and agreerrrent of sales before the Sub-Registrar, serilingampally on various dates for registration. That Sub- Registrar without assigning any reasons refused registration. It is observed from the record that Sub- Registrar placed reliance on a communication of the office of rahsildar (Deputy collector cadre), Serilingamparly Mandzd, dated Ni1.09.201 1, Lr.No.B/ S22l2OtT (page No.23, P3) and refused registration. 48- on appeal District Registrar confirmed the o'rder of the Sub-Registrar on the basis of notification dated

26.09.2013 issued by the office of District collector, Ranga Reddy District. That the properties are in prohibited list.

49. i:t was contended that the Sub-Registrar and the Distrir:t Registrar on appeal could not have refused. regist::ation of documents. It was further contended that the rrotification dated 26.o9.2019 was only a draft notifi<:ation and the same cannot be relied by the office of Distri:t Registrar. 29 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch I I i i !

50. It is pertinent to extract the relevant portion of the notification communicated to the office of Sub-Registrar. The same is as follows: THE RANGA REDDY DISTRICT GAZETIE EXTRA ORDINARY PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY Ranga Reddy District Serilingampally Mandal Rajendraaagar Division R.R. No. 86 File No. ES / 47 33 I 20 1 3/ Serilingampally/ Gopanpally Dated: 26-O9-2OL3 Appendix NOTIFICATION ln exercise of the powers conferred under G.O.Ms. No. 863 Rev. (Reg.1) Dept., dated: 20-6-2007 and CCLA's circular Instructions No. 81/385/2O12, dated: 29-5-2013. The following lands are notified under Section 22-A (Ll (a) for the purpose of section 22A(ll, Notice is hereby given inviting objections and suggestions on the above proposal from all persons who are likely to be affected thereby for being taken into considering by the Government. All objections and suggestions should be in writing in English or in Telugu and should be addressed to the Collector (by designation) of Ranga Reddy District within whose jurisdiction the area lies, so as to reach the oflice of the Collector, Ranga ReddSr District on or before the expiry of thirty days from the date of publication of this notification in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette.

51. On a perLrsal of the notification dated 26.O9.2OL3 communicated which contains the list of prohibited properties, can at best be a notification calling for objections to arrive at a final list of prohibited properties. The notification cannot be termed as a final notification of prohibited properties upon which documents can be refused for registration. The notification relied on by the 30 W.P.No.4475 of 202r.'*:i Districl: Registrar cannot be said to be in tune with the law laid do'wn by the Full Bench.

52. A similar notification issued on 26.09.2013 fell for considr:ration before this court in w.p.No. 19069 of 2014, with the following prayer: "... to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Ranga Reddy District, Gazette Notification R.R.No.g6, 26.09.2013, P roc. No. E 5 / 47 3 3 / 20 I 3 / Serilingampally f Hafe ezpet dt.26.O9.2013 by the 2nd respondent in so far as it r,:lates to lands in Sy.No.78 and 80 of Hafeezpet village Serilingampally Mandal, R.R.District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act and consequently set aside the same and grant such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.,, issued

53. A learned single Judge of this court by order dated

25.O8.2O 14 held as follows: C)rder : "It is the case of the petitioners 1 to 3 that they e-re the owners of the land admeasuring Acs.50.00 E;untas in Survey No.78 of Hafeezpet Village. The claim c,f the 4th petitioner is that he is the owner and he is in possession of another extent of land admeasuring /tcs.115.00 guntas in Survey No.8O of Hafeezpet Village, fierilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy Oiitrict. The petitioners intend to sell the above extents of land and lyhg" they approached the Sub-Registrar, Moosapet, I{yderabad-4th respondent, they were informed about the District Gazette notification issued by the District ()ollector, Ranga Reddy dated 26.09.1913 in which the ,bjections were called from the aJfected persons against the proposal to noti$r the lands in Survey Nos.77, 1g, Zg :md 80 of Hafeezpet Village of bahnagar and 3l JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch Serlingampally Mandals, Ranga neday District covered under C.S.No.I4 of 1958 under Section 22-A of t};re Indian Registration Act, 1908 (for short'the ActJ.

2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the said notification is without power or jurisdiction. A notification can be issued concerning the properties which are mentioned in Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Act by the State Government and the District Collector has no power to noti$r any properties covered by Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Act as the registration of Government lands by way of deeds of conveyance were prohibited. Learned senior counsel placed reliance on earlier orders issued by the Government in memo No.28908/JAll2OO4-L, dated 05.11.2OO4 and memo No.5973a/JA.l/2OO5, dated 18.05.2009, which inter alia disclosed that these lands are treated as private lands and directions were issued for mutation in terms of the orders in C.S.No.14 of 1958.

3. Learned senior counsel further submits that attempts made by the State Government in this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court have failed and therefore, the. above orders are issued. Learned senior counsel therefore submits that the present notification issued by the District Collector treating it as sarkari is contrary to the orders of the Government and the District Collector does not have competence and power to overrule the orders of the Government and notiSr the subject land as sarkari land.

4. The matter underwent few adjournments at the instance of the learned Advocate General. When the matter is called, the Advocate General produced a memo f,rled by the 2nd respondent, wherein reference was made to the order of status quo passed by the Supreme Court in SLA (C) No(s).17362-1736312O14 and also orders passed by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District in Case No.D5/54L2/2014, dated O6.O8.2OL4, suspending the mutation granted in respect of M/s.Savera construction.

5. Learned Advocate General submitted that in view of the order o f status quo granted by the Supreme Court and further orders passed by the Joint Collector suspending the mutation orders passed in favour of M/s.Savera construction, no further action can be taken. )L W. P.No.4475 of 202 t.'*:il

6. Learned Advocate General submits that the lands in Survey Nos.77, 78, 79 and 8O of Hafeezpet Village are Gc,vernment lands and that the Government is taking appropriate steps in this regard.

7. As regards the rival contentions on various issues concerning status of land and Govemment right to assert its title that cannot be gone into in this case.

8. The only issue for consideration in this writ petition is whether the notification issued by the District Collector ar:rounts to prohibition of registration of lands m:ntioned therein concerning Survey Nos.77 to 80 of Hafeezpet Village in purported exercise of power under Se:ction 22(A)(t)(e) of the Act. 9. Learned Advocate General submits that the notification in question is not issued under the above seid provision and that it is erroneously mentioned and that the power is vested to issue a notification only in the State Government under Section 22(Al(2) of the Act. Further the State Government is entitled to call for the report from the District Collector and the notification issued on26.O9-2013 is for the purpose of compiling thd information and submitting a report to the State Government to enable it to issue a notification under Sr:ction 22(A)(21of the Act. 1(). In other words, learned Advocate General fairly submits that there is no notification issued as on today under Section 22(Al(2l.of the Act. It is further submitted ttrat only after receipt of report from the District Collector and after examining the same by the State Government, appropriate action as warranted by law rrore particularly under Section 22(A)(2) of the Act would be taken. I 1. In view of the submission of learned Advocate General, it is made clear that notification dated 26.09.2013 is not a notification under Section 22(Al(21 o[ the Act and since, as on today, there is no such notification issued under Section 22(Al(2) of the Act, there is no restraint on the registering authorit5r to rr:ceive and process the deeds of conveyance concerning tlre lands in Survey Nos.79 to 80 of Hafeezpet Village.

12. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar to receive and piocess the deedi of JJ JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch conveyance without reference to the District Gazntte notification dated 26.O9.2OL3 in accordance with the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and the [ndian Stamp Act, L899. However, it is open to the registering authority to refuse to register the deeds presented before him, if he has any other objection, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate the decision to the petitioners. It is made clear that mere registration of deed of conveyance does not confer title to the property and it is made clear that this order does not preclude the Government to take appropriate steps as warranted by law and to assert its title. No costs."

54. This Court has taken note of the order of the learned Single Judge and the submissions made by learned Advocate General in the matter in W.P.No.l9O69 of 2OL4.

55. The notification that fell for consideration in W.P.No. 19069 of 2Ol4 and the notification in these writ petitions is pai matena, it is apparent that the notifications issued are on the same day by the office of the District Collector. Having perused the order of the learned Single Judge, this Court is of the view that the contention, that, order in W.P.No.19069 of 2014, is applicable to the facts of the case is tenable and valid.

56. Be that as it rrol, the learned Single Judge at Paragraph No.12 held as follows 34 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch "L2. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the dr:eds of conveyance without reference to the District Gazette notification dated 26.09.2013 in accordance with the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Sl.amp Act, 1899. However, it is open to the registering authorit5r to refuse to register the deeds presented before hjm, if he has any other objection, by duly assigning in support of such decision and communicate r€asons ttLe decision to the petitioners. It is made clear that mere r6:gistration of deed of conveyance does not confer title to ttre property and it is made clear that this order does n,:t preclude the Government to take appropriate steps ari warranted by law and to assert its title. No costs."

57. This Court is not inclined to take a different view from v/hat has been held in the order of learned Single Judge at Paragraph No.12, the same view is endorsed by this Ccrurt.

58. F. Full Bench of this Court in Vinjamuri Rajagopata Chary and others a. Principal Secretqry, Reaenue Departtnent, Hgd.erabq.d. and. others3, dealt with respect to the entire gamut of Section 22-A of the Act. Further a Divisicn Bench of this court in a batch of writ petitions, considered the validity of Section 22-A of the Act as incorporated in the Registration Act, 19OB vide A.R. Amen<lment Act No.19 of 2oor with effect from 20.06.200r. '2015 S()C OnLine Hyd,4oT 35 w.P.No.4475 of 2021"'*f;i The validity of Section 22-A of the Act was upheld by the Division Bench in rnaectq. Technologies Priaate Limited and. Others o. Goaernment of Andhrq. prad.esh, Hgderabad q,nd Othersq. A combined reading of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court and the Division bench and various orders in writ petitions, it is evident that any refusal for registering a property by an office of Sub- Registrar can be only in accordance with the Act and as per the law laid down by the Full Bench. The notification issued in not in accord.ance with law.

59. In Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary q.nd others a. Principal Secretany, Reaenue Department, Hgderabq.d and others (3 supra), the Full Bench summarised the conclusions at Paragraph No.15B (in the form of points from I to XV), the relevant points in the present context are as follows: "158. We, thus, summarize our conclusions and issue directions as follows : - (i) The authorities mentioned in the guidelines, which are obliged to prepare lists of properties covered by clauses (a) to (d), to be sent to the registering authorities under the provisions of Registration Act, o2o23 SCC Online TS 4565 36 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021& batch shall clearly indicate the relevant clause under which each propert5r is classified. (ii) Insofar as clause (a) is concerned, the concerned District Collectors shall also indicate the stltute under which a transaction and its registration is prohibited. Further in respect of the properties covered urrder clause (b), they shall clearly indicate which of the Governments own the propert5r. (iii) lnsofar as paragraphs (3) and (4) in the Guidelines, covering properties under clause (c) and (d) are concerned, the authorities contemplated therein sh.all also forward to the registering authorities, along wjth lists, the extracts of registers/ gazette if the property is covered by either endowment or wakf, and de,clarations/orders made under the provisions of Ct:iling Acts if the property is covered under ctause (d). (iv) ...... v) No notification, contemplated by sub-section (21 of Section 22A, is necessary with respect to the properties falling under clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 22-A. (vi) ..... (vii) The registering authorities would be justified in refusing registration of documents in respect of the properties covered by clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) ol Section 22-A provided the authorities contemplated u:rder the guidelines, 4S aforementioned, have communicated the lists of properties prohibited under ttLese clauses. (viii) The concerned authorities, which are obliged tc furnish the lists of properties covered by clauses (a) tc, (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 22-A, and the concerned Registering Officers shall follow the guidelines scrupulously. (ix) It is open to the parties to a document, if the re:levant propert5r/land finds place in the list of p.:operties covered by clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (l) o1'Section 22-A, to apply for its deletion from the list or rrLodification thereof, to the concerned authorities as provided for in the guidelines. The concerned authorities a-:e obliged to consider the request in proper perspective a.rd pass appropriate order within six weeks from the date of receipt of the application and make its copy arailable to the concerned party. ')(.....xv." \I 37 w.P.No.4475 of 2021"'*ti

60. It is submitted by learned counsel for official respondents that by letter dated O7.O4.2O25, office of District Collector communicated a list of prohibited properties to the office of Sub-Registrar(s) (through the office of IG) and authorities be granted liberty to initiate steps or act in the light of the new list dated O7.O4.2O25. Needless to state that authorities are empowered under law and are not precluded to act within the frame work of law. 6L. It is submitted that pursuant to interim directions documents presented were received, registered and released in the batch of writ petitions. In view of the submissions made, this Court is of the opinion that no further orders are necessary as far as registration of documents is concerned "qlra" the petitioners in the batch of writ petitions.

62. Having considered the entire factual matrix of the case, the order of the learned Single Judge, the law laid down by the Full Bench, the Division Bench of this Court and the Act, this Court is of the opinion that the order of respondent No.2 bearing No. 18183/G L /2019 dated 38 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch o L7 106/i2O2O acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2013 File No.ES /4733/20t3 Serilingrempally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector, confirming the Order of the Third Responrlent in Refusal No.76 of 2O19 dated L9 lll/2019, acting <rn the alleged letter bearingNo.B/322/2007, dated 08l09 l20Ll, are set aside.

63. B: that as it may, Authorities are not precluded from taking steps as warranted by law, in respect of the prohibited properties communicated uide letter . dated

07.O4.ilO25, by office of District Collector to the office(s) of Sub-Rr:gistrar(s) (through the office of IG). 6+. For reasons aforesaid, Writ Petitions are allowed " qua" lJ:.e writ petitioners, "qud' the prayers. No costs. I\{iscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petitio;r shall stand closed. Date: Ct6.lO.2025 plp/vpt J