Gottumukkala Venkata Ram Kumar Varma v. consequently direct the 3rd

THE HON'BLE SRI JT'STICE N .V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.l2l24 of 2023 This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: ". ..declaring the action of the respondents in passing Refusal Order No.46/ 2023 dt.O4.03.2O23 refusing to register the Sale Deed pending document No.112 of 2023 tuith regard to the House beairug Municipal No.256/D/8/5/27 (PTIN No. 12 19992785), Plot No.27,'admeasuing 3OO sq.yards., situated at Khanamet uillage, GHMC Serilingampallg Circle, Serilingampallg Mandal, Ranga Reddg Distict on the ground of Lr.No.ES/2825/2O21 dt. 10.06.2021 issued bg the Distict Collector and also on the Letter No.B/ 1751/2017 dt.16.06.2017 issued bg the Sth respondent as highlg illegal, arbitrary and set asid-e the same and consequentlg direct the 3rd respondent to receiue, register and release the Sale Deed Pending document No.112 of 2023 submitted, bg the petitioner for registration with regard to the House beanng Municipal No.2- 56/D/8/5/27 (PTIN No.1219992785) Plot No.27, admeasuing 3OO sq.gards-, situated at Khanamet uillage, GHMC Serilingampallg Circle Senlingampallg Mandal, Ranga Reddy Distict (subject property) u-tithout reference to the Lr.No.ES/ 2825/ 2O21 dt. 10.06.2021 issued bg ) the Distict Collector and No.B/ 1 75 1 / 20 1 7 dt. 1 6.06.20 1 7 5th respondent..." lssued Letter bg the

2. Tlne facts of the case in brief are :hat petitioner claims to be purchaser of subject plot from one Smt.Settipalli Lalitha and others who acquired the til.le to the property from one Mr.Jaya Rao having purchased ulde rcgistercd sale deed and constructed house .lft,lr obtarning permission from GHMC and was in peacel'ul posser;sion and enjoyment of the same

3. The petitioner, thereafter, approachr:d respondent No.3 for registration of the subject plot ir-r his far.our, however, respondent No.3 refused to register the same and assigned pending Doc.No.P. 112/2023 and prassed relusal orrler No.46/2023 dated O4.O3.2O23 on the, g,ror-rnd that the District Collector uide Lr.No.E5l2825 12021 dated 1O.06.2021 declared the land in Sy.No.4l/ 11 situated at Khanamet as Government land and prohiblted for registration. The further reason is that as per the l:ttcr No.B / 175l /2017 dated 16.06.2O17 , issrred by the Tahsildar, Serilingampally, the land is assigled land and J hence the registration of sale cannot be entertained. It is further submitted that prior to the above said letter, the District Collector issued notif,rcation dated 26.09 .2O13 calling for objections and suggestions for inclusion of the lands in the prohibitory register under Section 22(A)(1)(e) of the Registration Act, 19O8 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter). However, the said notification was set aside by an order of this Court in W.P.No.19O69 of 2OI4 dated 25.Oa.2014.

4. Thereafter, no notification was issued by the Government notifying the subject lands unde r the prohibitory register under Section 22-A of the Act. The petitioner's further case is that since no final notification has been issued by the Government, respondent authorities cannot refuse registration on the basis of draft notification. it is further submitted that the letter was issued by respondent No.5 dated 16.O6.2017 circulating list of Government lands for prohibition of registrations and in the said letter, the subject land in Sy.No.41/ I 1 was not at all mentioned and hence the refusal order of respondent No.3 is liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that the lands are private lands but the 4 Government have shown the subject lands as Government lands and prohibited the same for registratiorr. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is tiled.

5. This Court on 26.06.2023 has granr:ecl an inlerirn order directing respondent No.3 i.e., the Joint Sub- Registrar to receive and register the sale deerl presentr:cl by the petitioner in respect of the subject property- However, it is made clcar that the registration would be s,ubject to fina,l result of tl-rc writ petition

6. A counter affidavit has been filed by rhe Joint Sub- Registrar, Ranga Reddy District i.e respondent No.3 herein and rvould submit that petitioner ha; submitted a sale deed arnd thc same was refused for r,:gistratior-r on

30.0 i.2023 and the reasons for refusal had lrer:n informed through intimation of refusal on the samt: da5, to the parties to the document. The document wzLs refusecl for registration r,,ide Rule 161 (XVII) of Telangan:r Registrzrtion Rules and also on the instructions of tlommissioner Inspector General, Stamps and Registration, Telangana since the property impugned is Government land as pe: list t 5 furnished by District Collector, Ranga Reddy District and constructions were made without approval of the competent authority. It is further submitted that the subject Iand in Sy.No.44/ 1 1 situated at Khanamet Viilage is a Government land as per the list furnished in Lr.No.E5/2825/2021 dated 10.06.2021 io pursuance of the provisions of Rule 238 of Telangana Registration Rules and Section 22(l)(a)(ll of the Act. It is further submitted that no notihcation has been issued by the Government notifying the lands under Section 22-A of the Act whereas Rule 238 of the Rules formulated by the Government of Telangana uide G.O.Ms.No. 121 dated 01.06.2016 in pursuance of the orders of the High Court empowers the District Collector to furnish lists of immovable properties falling under clauses (a) and (b) of Sub Section (1) of Section 22-A of the Act including any subsequent additions, deletions or modification to the District Registrar concerned. The District Collector is authorized to sign to the list so furnished to the Registration Department

7. It is further submitted that as per the list of prohibited properties under Section 5 (2) of Telangana 6 Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfersl Act, 1977 uide Lr.No.B/ 175112017 dated 16.06.2017, Sly.No.44l 1 1S mentioned as assigned land and Section 5(1) of Telangana Assigned Lands (POT) Act, 1977 authorize:; the Revenue Authority and not below the rank of MRO/'lal.rsildrrr to send such communications. It is further sulrmitted that the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Telangana directed not to register such unauthorized plots uide Merno No.G2l25'/ /20 19 clated

26.08.2O2O and hence the impugned document was refused on that ground also. Making the aforesaid submissions, the lbarned Assistant Government Pleader pray this Court to vacate the interim order clated

26.06.2023 and dismiss the writ petition.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner sr-rbmits that this Court in W.P.No. 16109 of 2024 Lras set zisrde the letter 1n Lr.No.tr5l282512024 dated 10.06.2024 uide its order dated 19.O7 .2024. In the said order, thrs Court has referred to certain guidelines issued by the Fnil Bench of this Court in M/s.Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary a 1 Reaenue Departrnentr The relevant paragraph Nos.12 and 13 are extracted hereunder for reference: " 12 . It is also pertinent to note that in the case of Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary $upra) at paragraph 156 the Full Bench of this Court had summaized and issued directions. As per the Guideline (u), no nottf-cation is contemplated under sub-section (2) of Section 22(A) of the Act u.tith respect to the properties falling under clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 22(A). As stated earlier, as per Guideltne (ui), the properties couered under clause (e) of Section 22-A shall be notified in the official Gozette of the State Gouernments and shall be fonuarded, olong with the list of properties, and a copy of the releuant notification/ Gazette, to concerned registering authoities under the prouisions of the Act and shall also place the said notification/ Gazette on the websites of both the State Gouernments.

13. As such, the letter dated 1O.06.2021 in Lr.No.ES/ 2825/ 2021 and the similar letter dated 29.09.2021 in uhich reference of letter dated 1O.O6.2021 uas made, are onlg letters submitted bg Distict Collector, Ranga Reddg District to District Registrar, Registration & Stamps Department, Ranga Reddy Distict for ' zote (z).qr-o zlo (FB) : 2015 scc onl-ine Hyd 407 8 taking further necessara action and tha.t <:annot be the basis for refusal for registration of the subject propertA. 1l is also pertinent to rrc|e that subsequently, no notification was is:;ued by respondent authoities ulith respect to the list of lands mentioned in the letter dated 1C.06.2O22. In uietu of the same, letter dated 10.06.202 1 tn Lr.No.ES/2825/2021 and the stmilor letter dated 29.09.2O21 submitted bg Distict Collector, Ranga Reddg District to District Registrar, Registration & Stctmps Department, Rango Reddy District are not in consonance to the prouisions of Section 22 A of the Act and 22(A)(1)(e) and Clause (ui) of the guidelines and the same cannot be referred for the purpose of denging registration of the subject prtperties. Consequently, reference made Lr.No.E5/2825/2O21, dated 1O.06.2021 and similar letter dated 29.09.2O21 are per se illegal, arbitrarg and bad in latu and ar<: h.ereby set aside and writ petition stands allou,ed. Registering Authorities are directed to receiue, register and release the sale deed presented bg the petitioner in respect of the subject propertA, subject to the petitioner complging utith the prouisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and Indian Stamps Act, 1899. It is also open to the Registertng Authoritg to refuse to register the subject document, bg specificallg assignirtg the 9 reasons in terms of Section 71 of the Act, 1908 and communicate the said decision to the petitioner."

9. The Deputy Collector and Tahsildar has placed a copy of instructions through learned Assistant Government Pleader and would submit that as per the Wasool Baqui, the old Sy.No.55 corresponding to New Sy.No.41 to an extent of 252.24 is classified as poramboke and as per Sethwar the said land belongs to Government. It is further submitted that rn the year 1962, tll.e land in Sy.No,41 to an extent of Ac.47-00 gts., was assigned to 13 persons and from the documents, it is evident that the land in Sy.No.41/ 11 admeasuring Ac.5-00 gts., has been assigned to one N. Mailaiah and the names of the assignees have been brought on record. Later, it is noticed that the assignee/LR of assignee have sold the said assigned land in contravention of the assignment rules. The purchasers of the said assigned land have developed the same into residential layout iilegally and sold to various persons against the rules. As such the act of transfer of assigned lands is prohibited under the provisions of AP(TS) Assigned lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977 and the subject It) land is also included in the prohibited list as per Section 22-A of the Act

10. When the matter was taken up on 06.11.2024, learned counsel for the petitioner submittbd thzrt he has no instructions whether the subject property has been registered in terms of interim order passed b5, this Court and sought time to verify the same. T'hc:reafter on

12.11.2024, learned Assistant Government Plcader for Revenue sought time to get instructions and on

29.11.2024, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the subject document was registered. I 1. Heard learned counsel on either sid,: zrncl perused the material on record.

12. It is pertinent to note that in the refusal order, the Office of District Registrar has refused to register the subject property as per the list furnished by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District uide Lr.No.trS 12825 l2O2l dated 1O.06.2021, however, the said letter was set aside by this Court in W.P.No.16109 of 2024 datec 19.07.2024 t1 Therefore, rejection of registration on the said ground is not sustainable. It is further to be noted that the notification in R.R.No.86 dated 26.O9.2013 issued by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District is only calling for objections from all the affected persons. In the said notifrcation, the name of the assignee/ allotee/ owner of the subject property in Sy.No.41/ 1 1 admeasuring to an extent of Ac.5-00 gts., is shown as Nukala Mallaiah S/o. Venkataiah. However, the said notification was set aside by this Court in W.P.No.19069 of 2014 dated 25.08.20i4. The relevant portion of the said order reads as follows: "12. Heruce, the Wit Petition is disposed oJ directtng the SubRegistrar to receiue and process the deeds of conuegance without reference to the Distict Gazette notification dated 26.09.2013 in accordance tuith the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Howeuer, it is open to the registei4g authoitg to refuse to register the deeds presented before him, if he has ang other objection, bg dulg assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicate the decision to the petitioners. It is made clear that mere registration of deed of conueAance does not confer title to the propertg and it is made clear that this order does not 12 preclude the Gouernment to take appropriate sleps as warranted bg laut and to a.ssed ifs titte. No cosfs. " I 3 . The Deputy Collector and Tahsildar, Serilingampally Mandai issued a letter to t he ,]oint Registrar, Prashanthi Nagar, Moosapet dir.:cting hirn to furnish latest list of Government lands. In the saicl list lurnished by the joint Registrar, the su[:.jet:t lands in Khanamet Village '"vere also included. karn,:d counsr:l for the petitioner has produced a copy of prohib;ted properties list issued by Registration and Stamps Departnrent, Government of Telangana wherein the subject land in Sy. No.4 1 / 1 1 was shown as Government iand and the reason was stated as Lr.No.E5/2825 // 2021 dated

10.06.2021. However, the said letter was set aside by thls Court as stated supra

14. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his case would rely on similar orders passed b1, this Court ln W.P.Nos.457a8l2022; 4573112022; l<)22312022; 357 55 I 2O2 and 30967 I 2O2t . l3

15. In the present case, the Deputy Collector and Tahsildar i.e., respondent No.5 claims the subject property as Government land and submit that they are placed under prohibited list. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject document was registered. Hence, for removal of the subject property from the prohibited list, the petitioner may make an application under Section 22- A(a) of the Act as was held in M/s.Inuectra Technologies Put.Ltd., and others u. Governntent of Andhra Pradesh2. The relevant paragraph is as follows "29. It u.tas further held that sub-section (4) of Section 22A of the Act prouides a remedg to an aggieued party to approach the State Gouernment for deletion of his propertg from the notification. It has further been held that if ang such application is made, the competent authoity has to afford an opportunitg of hearing and an produce mateials/ documents in support of such a claim. The claim made bg an aggieued person has to be dealt ulith bg a speaking order. It has further been held that in case such an application is made under Section 22A(4) of the Act, the same has to be decided utithin a peiod of three opportunitg to '? zoz+ 1t1 N-t 2tz l4 months. It has also been held lhat the mechanism prouided under Section 22A/4) of the Act sh.all not preclude the parties to file ang other appropriate proceeding, including ciuil suit, for similar or appropiate relief. "

16. In view of the earlier orders passed by this Oourt in similar circumstances (cited supral the rt--fusal rlrder No.46 12023 dated 04.O3.2023 is hereby se1 aside and taking into account the submission mac c by le etrned counsel for the petitioner that the subject documeul has already been registered, it is made clear that nrere registt ation of the document does not confer title on the subject property and it is also made clear that this order wou[,] trot havr: any bearing on all those matters where title/rights o'the partit:s are pending before the authorities either in revis ..rn / appeai s for adjudication and in any other case this ordt:r also does not preclude thc parties in asserting their rights bcfirre a comf)etent Ciiurt of 1aw. This order also would not precludc the respondent authorities to take appropriate steps in accordance to law. However, for further conveyance of the stLlrject property, the petitioner may avail appropriate remedy as avajlable under law as observed by this Court in M/s.Inuectra Technologies Put. Ltd., (supra} 15

17. With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// SD/- A. JAYASREE ASSISTANT RE ISTRAR SECTI OFFICER To, l.TheSecretary,StampsandRegistrationDepartment,secretariat'Hyderabad 2. The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District' 3. The Joint Sub-Registrar- 1, R.O., Ranga Reddy District' 4. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District' 5. The Tahsitdar, Serilingampally Mandal, R'R District 6. One CC to SRl. N M KRISHNAIAH Advocate [OPUC] T.TwoCCstoGPFoRSTAMPSANDREG|STRATIoN,HighCourtforthe State of Telangana. [OUT]

8. Two CD CoPies KK GJ 6 HIGH COURT DATED:1010612025 0 0 sEP ;l[25 ::; l. I 1) i 2,. \** \_i.. ORDER WP.No.12124 ot 2023 DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \\ 0