Mrs.Somara Keerthana v. Deputy Collector. Serilingampally Mandal

Order

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue ar-r 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.10516/G112079 dated 13.07.2O2O on the basis ol alleged notification vide File No.trS/4733l20i3lSerilingampally/Gopanpally, dared 26.09.2013 issued by the District Collector, contrary to the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 25.Oa.2O14 in WP.No.19069 ol 2Ol4 by confirming the rejection order of the third respondent bearing No.50 of 2O19 dated 03.06.20 19 refusing registration in a selective manner on the basis of rhe alleged lerter bearing No.B/322/2007, dated 08.09.2O11 issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampatly Mandal, in respect of the sale deed dated 29.05.2019 executed in favour of the petitioner herein vide pending Document No.328 of 2Ol9 for Plot No.78 admeasuring 2OO sq. yards in Sy.No.36/AA/ 16, situared in Venkateswara Nagar Colony, Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Rangareddy District as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to Iaw, 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 forthwith to receive and register the Gift Deed dated 29.O5.2O19 , bearing Pending Document No.328 of 2Ol9 executed in favour of the petitioner and to pass such other order or orders..." )

2. Heard Mr. Y.Pandarinath Goud, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. D'Haritha Kiran' learned Assistant Government Plearlcr for Stamps and Registration appearing for respondents.

3. Learned 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 2O2l & batch' that by common order dated 06.IO'2025, this Court allowed the writ petitions. Hence, simiiar orders be passed in this writ petition.

4.Forreasonsalike,asstatedinthecommonorder'dated 06.10.2025, in W.P.No.4475 of 2O2l & batch and in terms thereof,theWritPetitionisallowed"qud'thewritpetitioner'

" qua" tkre prayer. No order as to costs' Miscellancous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed' SD/. P.C.SULEKHA DEVI REGISTRAR ISSISTANT //TRUE COPY// t\ SECTION OFFICER 'J To, 1 2 3 The Soecial chief secretary, Revenue (Registration and stamps)Department, O-sfoik, aih Ftoor, Tetangana Secretariat. Hyderabad - 5ooo22. The District Registra r, I\,4oosapet, Prashanth t$O^L1On Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Raingareddy District, Telangana-500072' The Sub-Resistrar. Serilingampally, H.N0. 1 -6 O 13017 61 1 34. 1 -60 130 17 7 I 1 34 AnlaAh Nag5r, Gachibowti Hyberlbad. Rangareddv District, Telangana- 6,nnnR'1

4. One CC to SRI Y. PANDARINATH GOUD, Advocate IOPUCI 5. Two CCs to GP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad . [OUf] (Along with a copy of Common Order, dated. 06.10.2025 in W.P No.4475 ol 2021 & batch)

6. Two CD Copies {t PMK TKS HIGH COURT DATED:07 t1Ot2O2S ORDER WP.No.5018 of 2021 -1: Hts 6 t 3 zJ ilAR 2026 t * E C)i -a t ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS &,Ptl.A IM Dt ,,\1\* THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION Nos.4475 4480 4494 45o2 4542 5072 3681, 3998. 5080, 5091, 5118, 5145, 5399, 5415,5420,5429, 5435 5436 s926 6234 623a 54+1 5446 677L 6772 6779 67aL 8331 and 88OO of 2O21 COMMON ORDER: W.P.No.4475 of 2O2l is frled 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 o[ the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.576/Gl /2020 16/06/2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.85 of 2019 dated 19/11/2019, in respect of the Plot No.65 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 11, situated at Gopanpally Viltage, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/0912013 in File No.ES /a733 /2O 13/ Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dared Oa/O9/2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective marlner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrarJr 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 furttrer direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 10lO7/2019, bearing Pending Document No. P455/19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.P.No.4480 of 2O2l is filed with the following 2 prayer: ) JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & balch "...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 proceedrngs bearing No.18193/G1/2019 dated 17 l06 /2O'2O conhrming the Order of the Third Responderlt in Proceedings bearing No.99 of 2019 dated 19l1ll2OL9, in respect o[ the Plot No.303 in Survey Nos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopaapally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acdng on the allegcd notification dated 26/0912013 in Fite No.E5 /4733 /20 13 /Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dared Oa/O9/2OIl stated to have been issued by the Tahsitdar and Deputy Collector, Serilinganrpally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arl>rtrary, discriminatory, contraq/ to law, suffers from junsdictional errors arld violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articlesl4 ald 300 A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of Sale-Cum [rrevocable General Pou,er of Attorney dated 25107 l2019, bearing Pending Document No.P5O4/2019 executed rn favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.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 proceedrngs bearing No.586/G l/2020 16/0612O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.199 of 2019 dated 21/1ll2ol9, in respect of the Plot No.42 in Survey Nos.36/AA/7, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on thc allcged notihcation dated. 26109/2013 in File No.D5 /a733 /20 13/ Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said ro have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated, OalOg/2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, 3 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch Serilingampa-lly 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 Sa.le Deed dated 16 /O9l2o19,bearing Pending Document No. P667 /2O19 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.B37 /Gl /2079 dated 16.06.2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Refusal Proceedings bearing No.l04 of 2019 datcd 19/lIl2ol9, 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 26/09/20I3 in File No.ES / 47 33 I 2Ol3lSerilingampaily/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated OalA9/2011 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 Articles14 and 300-A of the Constitution o[ lndia ald further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sa-[e Deed dated O9lO8l2OL9, bearing Pending Document No.P576 of 2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." W.P.No.4542 of 2O2l 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 & barch -on declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedrngs bearing No. 181g6/G1/2019 dated 17/06/2O2O confirming rhe Order oI the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.97 of 2019 dated 19/11/2019, in respect of the plot No.lg6 in Survev Nos.36//A"{/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandat, Ranga Reddy District, acting the alleSed notification dated 26/ogl2ors in "Fite No.E5 /4733120 t 3/ Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector anj the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated O8/O9/20I1 stared to have been issued by the Tahsildar arrd Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, is a selective -u.rnJ. as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminarory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of n:rtural justice mod violative of Articles 14 and 30b-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 25/07/2019, bearing pending Document No.pSOO of 2019 executed in favour ofthe petitioner and pass...,, 6. W.P.No,5072 of 2O2t is filed with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more p;xticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No. 18185/Gt/2020 dated 17/06l2O2O confirming the Order ol the Third Respondent in proceedings bearing No.10O of2019 dated 19/lLl20l9 in respect of the plot No.16l in Survey Nos.36,/A416, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy Oistrict, acting the alteged notification dated 26/09/2013 in Fite No. ES /4733 /2013 /serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated OB/Og/2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Cottecto., Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective -.rr.r.. as being itlegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative ofifr" p.i""ipf." oi "on 5 JAK,J w.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 3O0-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and reBister the Sale Deed dated 27 /O7/2019, bearing Pending Document No.P526/19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

7. W.P.No.3681 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer FiIe "...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/G1/2019 dated L7/O6/2O2O acting on the alleged notification dated 26.09.2013 No.E514733/20r3 Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector, conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Retusal No.76 of2O19 dated 19/ll/2019, acting on the allcged letter bearing No.B/322 /2OO7 , dared, Oa/O9/2011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Manda.l, in respect of the Plot No.287 in Suwey Nos.36/AA/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, refusing to register the Agreement of Sale-Cum lrrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 03l07 l2O).9, bearing Pending Document No.433 of 2019 in a selective manner and contrary to the law laid down by this Honourable Court in W.P.No.19O69 of 2O14 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 30OA of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive arld register the Agreement of Sale-Cum-lrrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 03/O7 12A19 bearing Pending Document No.433 of 2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

8. W.P.No.3998 of 2O2l is hled with the following prayer: 6 JAK,J W P.No 4,175 of202l & batch "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus dcclaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No. 18I89/Gl/2019 dated 17 l06/2O2O conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.g2 of 20l9 dated 19/1112019 in respect ot the plot No.73 in Survey Nos.36,144/8, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Manda_[, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/A9/2013 in File No.E5/a733 /2A 13 /Seritingampally/Gopanpally, said to have bcen issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OOZ, dated O8/O9/2Ot l stated to have br:en issued by the Tahsildar arrd Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective marner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law suffers lrom jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300_,4 of the Constitution of India alld further dircct the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of Sale Cum-Irrevocable General power of Attorney dated 04/07/2019, bearing pending Document No.p442 of 2019 executed in favou r ofthe petitioner and pass ...,, W.P.No.5080 of 2O2t is hled with the following 9 prayer: " . . to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Directron more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.58l lGl /2020 16/06/2O2O conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No. 102 ot 20 l9 dated 19/11/2019, in respect of the plot No.t28 in Survev Nos.36/4-4/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ralga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09/2013 in File No.ES / a7 33 1 20 1 3/Serilingampally/Gopanpaly, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OOZ, dated 08/Og/2011 stated to Irave been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, 7 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discrirninatory, contrary to law, sullers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of 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 07 lo8l2ol9, bearing Pending Document No.P565/19 executed in favour ofthe petitioners and pass..."

10. W.P.No.5091 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer '...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the narure 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 19.11.2019, in respect of the PIot 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.Es /a7$ l20 l3/Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illega-l, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suflers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natura.l 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 27 /06/2019, bearing Pending Document No.P416/19 executed in favour of the petitioners and pass..."

11. W.P.No.S118 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction particularly one irr the nature of Writ of Mandamus 8 JAK.J W.P No.4475 of 2021 & batch declaring that the order the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.9O5lCl/2020 dated 16 / 06 l2cl2o conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.84 of 2019 dated 19/1.112()19. in respect of the Plot No.l40 in Survey Nos 3 6/AA/ 6,situated at Gopanpally Village, Senlingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated, 2610912013 in File No D5 /4733 / 2013 / Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to havc been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dared OalO9/2011 stated to have beerr issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Senlingampaliy Mandal, in a selective mzutner as being iltegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contraSl to law, suffers frorn jurisdrctional 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 Sa-le Deed dated 06/07 l2Ol9, bearing Pending Document No.P446/19 executed rn favour ofthe petitioner and pass...' W.P.No.S145 of 2O2l is filed with the foliowing

1.2 p rayer "..to lssue a al 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.57llGL/2020 dated 16l06l2O2O conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.74 of 2019 dated 19 llll2ol9, in respect of the Plot No-131 in Survey Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serihngampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the allegcd notihcation dated 26/0912O13 in Filc No.E5 /1733120 13/ Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No B/322/2OO7, dated Oa/O9/2011 stated to havc been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from .; urisdictional errors ald violative of the principles of 9 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & barch 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 Sa-le Deed dated 27 /06/2019, bearing pending Document No.p41S/19 executed in favour ofthe petitioners and pass..."

13. W.P.No.5399 of 2027 is filed with the following prayer "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more paiticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.tg2OL /Gl /2019 dated 17 .06.2020 conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in proceedings bearing No.130 of 2019 dated 21.11.2019, in respect of the plot No.ll1 in Survey Nos.36/AA/11, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notihcation dated 26.O9.2O13 in Filc No.ES / 4733 /20 t 3 /Serilingampally/ Gopanpalty, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2011 srated 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 3OO-A of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 25. lO.2O 19, bearing pending Document No.p7 56 / 20 19 executed in favour ofthe petitioner and pass-..,,

14. W.P.No.S415 of 2O2t 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. t8 t9O/G1/2019 dated 17.06.2O2O confirming the Order of the Third t0 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch Respondent in Proceedings bearing No. 1 10 of 20 19 dated 19 11.2O)9, in respect of the Plot No.28 in Survey Nos.36/A4./ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26.O9.2013 in File No.E5/4733120 l3/ Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to havc beerr 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, Serilingampallv Mandal, in a selective manner as being rllegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers lrorrr jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural lustice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and further direct the rcsponderlts to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 11.O9.2019, bearing Pending Document No.P646/2019 exe('utcd in lavour of the petitioner alrd pass..." W.P.No.5420 of 2O2l is hled with the following 15 praye r "...to issr.re a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more panrcularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus cleclaring that the order of the Second Respondent in procecdrngs bearing No.58O/G\ /2O2O dated 16.06.2O2O con firming the Order of the Third Respondent in Procecdings bearing No.I01 of2019 dated 19.11.2019, in respecl of the Plot No.305 in Survey Nos.36/AA/8, situatcd at copanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notihcation File No E5/4733/20 I 3 / Serilingampally/ Gopa-npally, said to have beeil issued by the District Collector and the letter bcaring No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2011 statcd to have bcer.r issued by the Tahsildar and Depufy Collector, Serilingamp:rllv Mandal, in a selective manner as being itlegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to larv, 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

26.09.2013 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch

27.O7.2019, bearing Pending Document No.P527 /2019 executed in favour of the petitioner ard pass..." W.P.No.5429 of 2O2l is frled with the following t6 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 proccedings bearing No.1835/G1/2020 dated 16l06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing 132 of 2O19 dated 2l/11/2019, in respect of the Plot No.110 in Survey Nos.36/AA/6, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampa.lly Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/O9/2013 in File No.ES/4733 /20 13 /Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated OA|O912011 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrar;r, discriminatory, contra-ry to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors ard violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India a.rld further direct the respondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 28llO/2079, bearing Pending Document No. P763 /2O19 executed in favour ofthe petitioner and pass..."

17. w.P.No.5435 of 2O2l is filed with the following prayer: ",..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.18200/G1/2019 dated 17/06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.117 of2019 dated 19/11/2019, in respect of the Plot No.257 in Survey 36/AA/71, situated at Gopanpally Village, t2 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on rhe alleged notrfication dated 26109/2013 in File No.D5la733 /20 13 / Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the Ietter bearing No.l3/32212OO7, dated Oa/Oq12011 stated to bcen issued bl, the Tahsildar ald Deputy Collector, Serilingarnpally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrar5r to law, suffers from junsdictional 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 16l09/2019, bearing Pending Document No. P665/2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

18. W.P.No.5436 of 2027 is filed with the following p rayc r "..to issuc a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the natur(r of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in procecdings bearing No. 18199/G1/2019 dated 17 06 2O2O conhrming the Order of the Third Respondcnt in Proceedings bearing No. 116 of 2019 dated 19 1 1 20 19, in respect of Lhe Plot No.268 in Survey Nos.36/A4/ I 1, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Redd.y District, acting on thc alleged notrfication dated 26.O9.2013 in File No.8514733 /20 1 3 / Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been lssued b,v the District Collector and the letter be:rring No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issued b1'the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illcgal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contraly to law, suffers from junsdictional errors and violative of the principles of na tura.l iustice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-,4 of thc Constitutlon o[ lndia and further direct the respondents to rcceive and register the Sale Deed dated 16.O9.2O19, bearing Pending Document No.P664 I 2079 executecl in favour of the petitioner arrd pass..." l3 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch

19. W.P.No.5926 of 2021 is frled with the following prayer: ' ". . . to issue a an appropriate Writ' Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus J".f..i.tg that the order of the Second Respondent in p.o.".ailg. bearing No)a177 lGl l2Ol9 106l2O2O conhrming the Order of the Third '17 *."r."a"", in Proceedings bearing No'73 of 2019 dated toittlzoto, in respect of t]le Plot No 80 in Survey r.ro. so7ea7 f +, situated at Gopanpally Village Serilingampatly Mandal, Ranga Reddy District' acting on notihcation dated 2610912013 in File ;;-;:"d No.E5 I 4; $ I 2o1 3/ Serilingampally/Gopanpally' said to hru" b.".t issued by the District Collector and the letter uea.ing No.e/s22i2o07, dated oalo912011 stated to ha.,e blen issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector' i".iii.tgr-prtty Mandal, in a selective manner as being tff"grl,"".Uio"fu' discriminatory' contrary to law' suffers froi jurisdictiona-l errors and violative of the principles of .rutrr.t .1r.tic. and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of ii. co.rstitution of India and further direct the .".pona..,t" to receive and register the Sate "::d 11:' i,ioutrrrn, bearing Pending Document No P384/2019 ex..ut"d in favour of the petitioner and pass " 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 narure of Writ of Mandamus that itre order of the Second Respondent in ;;;l;:"* p.oc""di-t,g. bearing No'574lGl l2O2O dated iulou lriro conirrming the Order of the Third *r=r."O"", in Proceedings bearing No 81 of 2O19 dated 'toittlzoto, in respect of the Plot No 77 in Survey N"".sdloAl t r, sih-lated at Gopanpally Village' t:tt"*i.,1 Senl i n ga m pally Mandal, Ranga Reddy Ol the aleged notiircation dated 2610912013 in I' e :'-1t-': 11 JAK.J W.P.No 4475 of202l & batch No.E5la733l20 13 / Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have beerr issued b5r the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated 08lA9/2o11 stated to havc been issued bl' the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Senlrngarnpally Mandal, in a selective manner as being rllegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers fronr jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative of Artrcles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India ald further di.rect the respondents to receive and register the Agreement of Sale-Cum Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 04lO7 l2019, bearing Pendrng Document No. P44I/2019 executed rn favour of the petitioner and pass ..."

21. W.P.No.6238 of 2021 is filed with the following prayer "... to issuc a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order o[ the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No. I8187/GI/2019 dated 17 /06/2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.111of20l9 dated L9lll/2019, rn respect of the Plot No.188 in Survey Nos.36/.4,4/ 1a, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the allr:ged notrficatron dalcd 26.O9.2013 in File No.E5 /4733 /20 13 / Serilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No. 81322/2007, dated O8lO9/2011 stated to have becn issued by the Tahsildar ald Depuff 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 Sale Deed dated ll/0912019, bearing Pending Document No.P647 12019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass -.." 15 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 oa202l & batch

22. W.P.No.5441 of 2O2l is fiIed with the foliowing prayer: "...to issue a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more parlicularly one in the nature of writ of Mandarnus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No-1836/G1/2020 dated 16l06l2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.113 of 2019 dated in respect of the Plot No.58 in Survey l9lll/2ol9, No.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Manda.l, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification dated 26/09/2013 in File No.E5 I a7 33 I 20 I 3 / Seritingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/322/2OO7, dated O8/O9/2011 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 Sale Deed dated 2l I OB I 2019, bearing Pending Document No.P659/2019 executed in favour ofthe petitioner ald pass..." W.P.No.5446 of 2O2l is filed with the following 23 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 | / 2O2O dated 1 6.06. 2020 conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.l20 of 2019 dated 2L.ll.2Ol9, in respect of the Plot No.38 in survey Nos.36/AA/7, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ralga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notification File

26.09.2073 l6 JAK,J W P No 4475 of202l & batch No.F,s I 47.]3 I 20 13/ Serilingampally/Gopanpa1ly, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212007, dated 08.09.2011 stated to have been issucd by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilinganrpally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers lrom jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natura-l jlrstice and violative of Articles 14 ard 300-4 of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the SaIe Deed dated 23.09.2019, bearing Pending Document No. P689/2O19 cxecuted Ln favour ol the petitioner altd pass ..."

24. W.P.No.6771 of 2O2I is filed with the following prayer "...to isslre a an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more parl.icularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order o[ the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.18178/G1/2O19 dated 17 l06l2O2O conhrming the Ordcr of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.87 of 2019 dated 19/ll/2019, in respect of the Plot No.182 in Survey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddl' District, acting on the alleged notification dated 261a9/2013 in File No.E5/4733120 l3/ SeriLngampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issucd by the District Collcctor and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, daftd AalO9/2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, in a selective manner as being illegal, aj'bitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violative ol Article 14 and 300-A 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 lllOT /2019, bearing Pending Document No. Pa59/2019 executed in favour o[ the petitioner ald pass .. . " t7 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch

25. W.P.No.6772 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. 592 / G | / 2O2O dated 1 6.06. 2020 confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.l52 of2O19 dated 09.12.2019, tn 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 notifrcation dared 26.o9.2O13 in File No.E5/4733/2013/ Serilingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Cotlector 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 [aw, suffers from jurisdictiona-l errors and violative of the princ.iples of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution ol India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the SaIe Deed dated 06.1L.2019, bearing Pending Document No.P777 /2019 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass .. ."

26. W.P.No.6779 of 2O2l is filed with the following praye r "..-to issue a an appropriate writ, Order or Direction more particularly one rn the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the Second Respondent in proceedings bearing No.593lGl /2O2O dated 16l06/2O2O confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing No.154 of 2019 dated O9/l2l2OL9, in respect of the Plot No.98 in Survey Nos.36/AA/14, situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the alleged notillcation d,ated 26/09/2013 in File l8 JAK,J W P.No.4475 of 202 I & batch No.ES / a7 33 l20 l3l Seritingampally/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter beanng No.B/32212007, dated O8/o9/2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsitdar and Deputl' Collector, Serilingampally Mandal, rn a selective manner as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and violative of the principles of natural justice and violaLive of Articles 14 and 300-A. of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to receive and register the Salc Deed dated 19lll/2019, bearing Pending Document No. P787 l2Ol9 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..." 27 . W.P.No.6781 of 2021 is filed with the follorving 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 proceedrngs bearing No.9352/Gl /2019 17 l06/2O2O conhrming the Order of thc Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing Relusat No.40 of 2019 dated 20l05/2019, in respect of the PIot No.82 in Suwey Nos.36/AA/ 14, situated at Gopanpatly Village, Scrilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, acting on the a.lleged notification dated 26/09/2013 in Fite No.E5 /,+733 / 2013lSerilingampally/Gopanpalll', said to have becn issucd by the District Collector arld the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, daled OalO9/2O11 stated to have been issued by the Tahsildar and Deputy Collector, Serilrngampally Mandal, in a selective marner as being illegal., arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law, suffers from jurisdictional errors and vioLative of the principles ol natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 30O-A of the Constifution of [ndia and further direct the rcspondents to receive and register the Sale Deed dated 20/05/2019, bearing Pending Document No. P301/2019 executed in favour ol the petitioner and pass..." t9 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch

28. W.P.No.B331 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.14OO9 /Gl /2019 dated 08/07 /2O2O conhrming the Order of the Third Respondent in Proceedings bearing Refusal No.34 of 2019 dated O2lO5l2Ol9, in respect of the Plot No.51 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 /4733 /2013 lSerilingampally/Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Collector and the letter bearing No.B/32212OO7, dated 08.09.20I1 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 Principies 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 02 / OS / 20 19, bearing Pending Document No.P262 / 20 19 executed in favour of the petitioner and pass..."

29. W.P.No.88O0 of 2027 is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue a Writ, Order or Dircction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing to register the SaIe Deed pending document No.878 of 2020 submitted by the petitioner for registration wth regard to the Plot bearing No.3 Part admeasuring 244-44 sq yards in Shilpa Poineer Block I in Sy.Nos.37 of Gachibowli village, Serilingampally Mandal, RR District vide refusal order No.2L7 of 2O2O dt.l7 /1212O2O as highly illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same and consequently direct the 3'd 20 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch respondent to receive, register and release the Sale Deed Pending Document No.878 of 2020 submitted by the petitioner for registration with regard to the PIot bearing No.3 Part admeasuring 244.44 sqyards in Shilpa Poineer Block l, in Sy.Nos.37 of Gachibowli village, Serihngampally Mandal, RR District wrthout reference to the proceedings of the District Collector d|.26.O9.2O13 and pass ..."

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

31. 'lhe sub.ject matter in all the Writ Petitions pertains to Plots in various Sub-divisions of Survey No.36 situated at Gopanpally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy Districr. For reference, facts in W.P.No.368 | of 2O2l are being considered (Serial No.7 in the batch of writ petitions).

32. It is the grievance of petitioner that respondents are refusing to receive and register the Agreement of Sale-cum- Irrevocable General Power of Attorney dated 03.07.20 l9 bearing document No.433 of 2O),9 in respect of plot No.2g7 in Sy.No.36/AA/8 (Sub Division No.8 of Sy.No.36) situated at Gopanpaily Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is submitted that the document has been 2t 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.ES I 47 33 I 20 1 3/ Serilingampalty/Gopanpally issued by District Collector and the letter bearing No.B /322 /2OOZ dated 08.09.2011 of the Tahsildar. It is further submitted that Sub-Registrar, Serilingampally, refused the registration of document that the scheduled propergr 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 Tahsi tdar.

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 17.06.2020 (Ex.P1) refused registration of the deed on the premise that property in Sy.No.36/AA/ 8 was included in the prohibited propert5r list vide notification in File No.ES /a733/2013/Serilingampaly/Gopanpally, dated 26.09.2013, issued by District Collector, Ranga Reddy District and as such the property could not be registered. 22 ]AK.J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch

35. It is submitted that notification relied upon by the Registrar in his order dated' 77 '06'2020 is in parimateria to tlrenotilrcatiorrwhichwasthesubjectmatterofchallenge before this Court and that this Court in W'P'No 19069 of 2014 by its order d,aLed 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' Placing reliance upon the judgment of the learned Singie Judge, it is contended that the said notification annexed at Page No.26 being in parimateria to that of the notification under challenge in the W'P'No' 19069 of 2014' the notification d,ated,26.09.2013 has to receive the same fate'

36. Learned 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 1a47812024, d'ated' 07 'O4'2025, is a subsequent list and the same cannot be relied upon' as the order of the Registrar and the Sub-Registrar are based on different 23 JAK.J W P.No.4475 of202l & batch notiflcation (earlier dated) and letter of Tahsildar. It is submitted that by letter dated O7.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 07.04.2025 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 .2025 cannot have a retrospective effect. 37 . Placing reliance on the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in Commissioner of Police, Bombag v. Gordhand'as Bhanjil, 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 alry improvement made by way of counter affrdavit or submissions cannot be added to change the purport of the order.

38. Basing on the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is contended that notification dated 26.O9.2013 of ' AIR 1952 sc 16 24 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 of 202l & batch the office of District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, fell for consideration before this Court and learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 25.08.20 14 in W.P.No. 19069 of 20 14 directed the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the deeds of conveyance without reference to the Notiflcation dated 26.09.20 13.

39. It is submitted that as the subject matter i.e., plots in various subdivided survey number(s) of Sy.No.36 are parcels of lancl in this batch of writ petitions which pertain to the notihctrtion, this Court may consider the order of learned Single Judge, unless different set of facts are borne out of record.

40. It is sutrmitted by learned counsel that as the facts are similar in nature, same order as in W.P.No. 19O69 of 2074 be passed

47. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents submitted that on the basis of a communication received, Tahsildar addressed a letter to Sub-Registrar, letter dated September, 2Ol l, that certain JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of202t & batch 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 notilrcation dated 26.09.2013 issued by the off,rce 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 Hontrle Apex Court in Mohinder Singh Gill and. another v. The Chiet Election Commissioner, Neut Delhi and othets2, invited the attention of this Court to paragraph No.8 of the judgment, wherein the observations of Honble Justice Bose in Commissioner o.f police, Bombag v. Gordhqndas Bhanji (1 supra) were extracted, on the basis I lrors; r scc +o: 26 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch of the contents, it lvas contended that notifrcation of the office of Collector have to be construed on the basis of Ianguage used therein

44. It is submitted that pursuant to Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 19O8 (for short 'the ActJ various notihcations 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.O9.2013.It is further submitted that on the information and data collected / gathered at the ground level, properties in various survey numbers have been included in the notillcation and the notification came to be issued on

26.O9.2013. It is also submitted that Collector is empowered to issue notification under Section 22-A of ttre Act.

45. It is submitted that upon the exercise of powers under Sectiort 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 27 JAK.J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch 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.19069 of 2Ol4 is pertains to set of lands situated in Hafeezpet 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 notifred. 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 notifrcation dated 07.O4.2025 of the oflice 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 specihc case of all the petitioners that they presented JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & balch sale deeds, development agreements' gift deeds and agreement of sales before the Sub-Registrar' Serilingampally on various dates for registration' That Sub- Registrar without assigning any reasons refused It is observed from the record that Sub- registration Registrar placed reliance on a communication of the office of Tahsildar (Deputy Collector Cadre)' Serilingampally Mandal. dated Ni1.09 2011, Lr'No'Bl322l2Ol7 (Page No.23, P3) and relused registration'

48. On appeal District Registrar confirmed the order of the Sub-Registrar on the basis of notification dated 26.Og.2013 issued by the office of District Collector' Ranga Reddy District That the properties are in prohibited list'

49. It was contended that the Sub-Registrar and the District Registrar on appeal could not have refused registration of documents lt was further contended that the notification dated 26 'Og '2013 was only a draft notification and the same cannot be relied by the office of District Registrar. 29 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch

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 Rajendranagar Division R.R. No.86 File No. E5/4733 /2o 13/Serilingampally/ Gopanpally Dated:26-o9 2013 ADPendix NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred under G.O.Ms. No. 863 Rev- (Reg-1) Dept., dated; 20-6 2OO7 ar.d CCLA's circular Instructions No. Bl/38512O12, dated: 29-5-2013. The following lands are notified under Section 22-A (ll (a) for the purpose of section 22A(l), 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 Reddy 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 perusal of the notification dated 26.09.2013 communicated which contains the list of prohibited properties, can at best be a notification calling for objections to arrive at a Iinal list of prohibited properties. The notification cannot be termed as a final notiflcation of prohibited properties upon which documents can be refused for registration. The notification relied on by the 30 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch District Regrstrar cannot be said to be in tune with the law laid down by the Full Bench

52. A similzrr notihcation issued on 26.09 .2013 feli for consideration before this Court in W.P.No.19069 of 2014, with the follou,ing prayer

26.09 .2013. ".. . ro rssue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Ranga Rcddy District, Gazette Notification R.R.No.86, Proc. No.E5 / 4 733/ 20 13 / Serilingampally/ Hafeezpet d,t.26.O9.2Q13 by the 2nd respondent in so far as it relates 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 ordcr or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and propr:r in the circumstances of the case." issued

53. A learnr:d Single Judge of this Court by order dated

25.O8.2014 held as follows Order "It is the case of the petitioners 1 to 3 that they are the owners of the land admeasuring Acs.SO.OO guntas in Survey No.78 of Hafeezpet Village. The claim of the 4th petitioner is that he is the owner and he is in possessr(,n o[ another extent of land admeasuring Acs. I 15.1)O guntas in Survey No.80 of Hafeezpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners intend to sell the above extents of Iand and when thcy approached the Sub Registrar, Moosapet, Hyderab:rd-4th respondent, they were informed about the District Gazette notification issued by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy dated 26.09.1913 in which the objections were called from the alfected persons against the proposal to notiE/ the lands in Survey Nos.77,78,79 axd 80 of Hafeezpet Village of Balanagar and 31 . JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch Serlingampally Mandals, Ranga Reddy District covered under C.S.No.14 of 1958 under Section 22-A of l}l:e Indian Registration Act, 1908 (for short'the Act').

2. l,earned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the said notihcation 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 notify any properties covered by Section 22l\l(ll(el 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 /JA 1/ 2004 1, dated 05.11.2OO4 and memo No.59734 /JA.1/ 2O05, dated 18.05.2009, which inter a-lia disclosed that these lands are treated as private lands and directions were issued for mutation in terms ofthe 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 Hontrle Supreme Court have failed and therefore, the above orders are rssued. karned senior counsel therefore submits that the present notihcation 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 notiS the subject land as sarkari [and.

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 filed by ttre 2nd respondent, wherein reference was made to the order of status quo passed by the Supreme Court in SLA (C) No(s).17362-17363/2014 and a-lso orders passed by the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District in Case No.DS/ 5412 /2014, dated 06.08.2014, suspending the mutation granted in respect of M/s.Savera construction.

5. Leamed 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. 32 JAK.J W.P.No.-1475 ol'2021 & batch .

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

7. As regards 1lre rival contentlons on various issues conceming status of lartd 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 amounts to prohtbition of registration of lands mentioned theriin concerning Survey Nos 77 to 80 of Hafeezpet Village in purported exercise of power under Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Act g. l,earne<l Advocate General submits that the notihcation in question is not issued under the above said provision and that it is erroneously mentioned and that the porver is vested to issue a notihcation only in the State (lovemment under Section 22(A)(2) of the Act' Further the State Government is entitled to call for the report frotn the District Collector and the notification isiued on 26.O9.2013 is for the purpose of compiling the information and submitting a report to the State Government to enable it to issue a notification under Section 22(A){2) ol the Act.

10. ln other words, learned Advocate General fairly submits that there is no notification issued as on today under Section 22lA)l2l of tlrre Act. It is further submitted that only after recetpt of report from the District Collector and after examining the same by the State Government, appropriate action as warranted by law more particularly under Section 22(A)(2) of the Act rvould be taken. 1 l. In view of the submission of lealned Advocate General, it is made clear that no$frcation dated 26.Og.2O13 is not a notification under Section 22(A)(2) of the Act and since, as on today, there is no such notification issued under Section 22(A)(2) of the Act, there is no restraint on the registering authority to receive and process the deeds of conveyance concerning the lands in Survey Nos.79 to 80 of Haleezpet Villagc' I2. Hencc, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar to receive and process the deeds of 33 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch conveyance without reference to the District Gazette notification dated 26.09.2013 in accordance with the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. 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 warralted by law and to assert its title. No costs."

54. This Court has taken note o[ the order of the learned Single Judge and the submissions made by learned Advocate General in the matter in W.P.No. 19069 of 2014.

55. The notification that felt for consideration in W.P.No.19069 of 2074 and the notifrcation in these writ petitions is pari materia, it is apparent that the notiflcations issued are on the same day by the offrce 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 may, the learned Single Judge at Paragraph No.12 held as follows: 34 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch " l 2, Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Sub-Registrar to receive arld process the dceds of conveyance without rcference to thc District Gazettc notrfication dated 26.O9.2013 in accordance lvith the lndian Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. However, it is open to the registering authority to reft-rse to register the deeds presented before him, if he has any other objection, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate thc decision to the petitioners. It is made clear that mere rcgistration of deed of conveyance does not confer title to the properq/ arld it is made clear that this order does not preclude the Government to take appropriate steps as wa-rranted by lau, and to assert its title. No costs."

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

58. A Fu1l Bench of this Court in Vinjornuri Rajagopala Chary and. others u. Principal Secretary, Retenue Departmen| Hgd.erabad a.nd others3, dealt with respect to the entire gamut of Section 22-A of the Act. Further a I)ivision 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, 1908 vide A. R. Amendment Act No.19 of 2007 with effect from 20.06.2007. 2015 S(lC Online IIvd 407 35 JAK,J w.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch The validity of Section 22-A of the Act was upheld by the Division Bench in Inaecta Technologies Priaate Limited and Others a. Gooernment of Andhra Pradesh, Hgderabad and Othersa. 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 notihcation issued in not in accordance with law.

59. In Vinjornuri Rajagopala Chary and others u. Principat Secretary, Reuenue Departtnent, Hgderabad and others (3 supra), the Full Bench summarised the conclusions at Paragraph No.l58 (in the form of points from I to XV), the relevant points in the present context a-re 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, 4 2023 SCC Online TS 4565 36 JAK,J W.P.No.4475 of 2021 & batch shall clearll, indicate the relevant clause under which each property is classified. (ii) Insofar as clause (a) is concemed, thc concerned District Collectors shall a-lso rndicate the statutc under rvhich a transaction and its registration is prohibited. Further in respect of the properties covered undcr clausc (b), they shall clearly indicate which of the Governments own the property. (iii) lnsofar as paragraphs (3) and (4) in the Guidelines, covering properties under clause (c) and (d) are concerned, the authorities contemplated therein shall also fonvard to the registering authorities, atong with lists. the extracts of registers /gazette if thi property is covered by either endowment or wakf, and declarations/orders made under the provisions of Cciling Acts lf the property is covered under clause (d). (iv) ...... v) No notification, contemplated by sub_section {2) o[ SectLon 22A, is necessary with respect to the propcrties lhlling under clauses (a) to (d) of sub_section ( 1) of Section 22 A. (v, . -. (vii) 'lhe registering authorities would be justified in refusing registration of documents in respect of the propcrties covered by clauses (a) to (d) of sub_section (1) of Section 22-A provided the authorities contemplated under thr: guidelines, as aforementioned, have comnlunicated the lists of properties prohibited under these clauses. {viii) The concerned authorities, which are obliged to lurnish thc lists of properties covered by clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (l) of Section 22-A, and. the concerned Registering Officers shall follow the guidelines scrupulously. (ix) lt is open to the parties to a document, if the relevirnt property/land finds ptace in the list of prop('rties covered by clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Set--tion 22-A, to apply for its deletion from the list or modilication thereof, to the concerned authorities as provided for in the guidelines. The concemed authorities are obliged to consider the request in proper perspective and pass appropriate order within six weeks from the date. of receipr of the application and make its copy avail:rble to the concerned parfy. x.... xv 37 JAK,J W-P.No.4475 of 2O2l & batch

60. It is submitted by learned counsel for ofhcial respondents that by letter dated 07 .O4 .2025, 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. 61 . 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 "qua" th.e 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 FuIl 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/G1/2019 dated 38 w.P.No.4475 "r202r &r*[i the alleged notification dated 17 /06/2O2O acting on 26.O9.2Ot3 Fiie No.Es/aZfi/2013 Se ri lingampal Iy/ Gopanpally, said to have been issued by the District Coliector, confirming the Order of the Third Respondent in Refusal No.76 of 20l9 dated tg/11/2019, acting on the alleged letter bearing No.B /322 /2007, dated 08 /09 /20 | 1, are set aside. 63 taking steps as warranted by law, prohibited properties communicated Be that as it may, Authorities are not precluded from ln respect of the r.ide letter dated 07 -O4.2025, by office of District Collector to the ofhce(s) of Sub-Registrarfs) (through the office of IG). 64' For reasons aforesaid, writ petitions are arowed " qua" the writ petitione rs,,,qua,,the prayers. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed Date: 06. lO2O2S plp/vpt ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J