High Court · 2025

,..RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus in decraring the action of the Respondent No.4 in not receiving, registering and rereasing the document (sare Deed) presented by the Petitioner inter aria Frat No.'r04, with an buirt-up area of 1200 sq.Ft together with an undivided share of land of 46 Sq. yards, situated in Sy.No. 343116 of Bandamkommu H/o. Ameenpur Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District, as illegal, arbitrary and Unconstitutionar and is in vioration of Articre 300A of constitution of rndia and provisions of Registration Act, 1g0g and consequenfly l -+ direct the Respondents to delete the Writ Schedule Property from Prohibitory list under Section 22-A ctf Registration Act 1908. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.4 to receive, register and release the document (Sale Deed) presented by the Petitioner is respect of Flat No.104, with an built-up area of 1200 Sq.Ft and an undivided share of land 46 Sq. Yards, situated in Sy.No. 343116 ol Bandamkommu H/o. Ameenpur Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJA SRIPATHI, Sr. COUNSEL, REP. FOR SRI MIRZA ADNAN AHMED BAIG Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR STAMPS & REGISTRATION The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR W.P. No.35996 of 2024 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.4, Sub-Registrar, Patancheru, Medak District, in not receiving, registering and releasing the document (Sale Deed) presented by the petitioner in respect of Flat No. 104, with built-up area of 1200 sq.ft., together with an undivided share of land of 46 sq.yds., situated in Sy.No.343/ 16 of Bandamkommu H/o. Ameenpur village and. M4ndal, Sangareddy District, (hereinafter referred to as the subject property) as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct.the respondents to delete the subject property from the prohibitory list under Section 22-A of th.e Registration Act, 1908.

2. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm registered under the provisions of the Partnership Act having registered its registered office at Sy.No.343/ 16 Ameenpur village and Mandal, Sangareddy District.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of open place admeasuring 2329.47 sq.yds., which is equivalent ro 1947.67 sq.mts., in Sy.No.343/ 16, situated at Bandamkommu H/o. Ameenpur village and Mandal, Sangareddy Distrfut*having purchased the same vide registered sale deed bearing l 2 s.P. No.36996 of2024 Document No.22136 of 2O2l dated 17.06.2021 registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar office Sangareddy.

4. It is further submitted that prior to the purchase of the said land, the vendors of the petitioner had approached the competent authority for grant of permissions for development of the aforementioned property into residential apartments and accordingly obtained the permiision for construction of apartments for stilt + five upper floors vide technical approval No.O39771/SKPlRl /U6/HMDA/ OalO2O2O, dated 26.03.2021 . Thereafter, the petitioner had constructed residential apartments consisting of 5O flAts and in view of completion of the construction in all perspectiv", tt. .omplient authorities have also issued Occupancy Certificate vide Proceedings No.OO272O/OClHMDA/osss/ SKP/2024, dated O2.O5.2024. It is further submittcd that out of 50 flats, the petitioner alienated 47 flats and the same were registered in favour of the purchasers.

5. While the matter stood thus, the petitioner had entered into sale agreement for alienating of the subject Flat No.104 and paid the requisite stamp duty and registration chargcs to the Government. However, the respondent No.4 had refused to receive and register the said sale deed on the ground that the subject properly is entered in the prohibitory list from the Government. - ravs( J w.P. l{0.36996 of 2024

6. The learned Senior Counsel Sri Raja Sripathi appearing for the petitioner while reiterating the aforesaid facts would further submit that no notices of whatsoever in nature were given to the petitioner and the petitioner is also not aware for what reasons the subject property was notified in prohibitory list. Further, he placed a copy of thb Endorsement made by the Joint Sub-Registrar-1, Sangareddy, on

18.01.2023 that "Th.e scheduled propertg uide D.No.22136/2O21 of RO, Sangareddy is not prohibited for registralion. " thereby, the stand taken by the respondent No.4 now refusing to register the subject property amounts to depriving the petitioner from enjoying its property. He would further submit that the construction of apartment' project has been completed and Occupancy Certificate from the office of the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority was obtained and out of 50 flats constructed, almost all the flats were sold except three flats and at this point of time, placing the entire subject survey number i.e. 343 under the list of prohibited properties impedes the registering authority to register the subject flat.

7. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that though specifically subject flat has not been shown as prohibited, however the entire subject survey number has been included in the prohibited list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act as such, the respondent authorities have refused to register the subject flat for registration. ) -1 w.P. lto.a6995 0t m2.

8. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material made avaiiable on the record.

9. The main grievance of the petitioner is that due to placing the entire subject survey number under prohibitect list, the registering authority is refusing to register thc subject flat. A copy of the prohibited properries of Registration and Shmps Department, Government of Telangana has becn {iled as material papers in the writ petition lO. On a perusal of a copy of the said list of prohibited propertics, it is clear that the subject survey number i.e. Sy.No.343 is shown as " assigned land and- MRO patancheru, however, it has been placed under prohibited list for registration. 1 1. At this juncture, it is not out of place to mention that in the case of M/s.Invecta Technologies private Limited Vs. Government of Andhra pradeshr wherein the Division Bench of this Court has upheld the validity of the Section 22-A of the Registration Act, while referring to the decision of the Fu[ Bench in the case of Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary Vs. Revenue Departnent2 wherein had issued certain directions and the relevant direction herein at para No. 156 is that "-... (i4 It is open to the parties to a d_ocument, tf the rereuant propertg/ land finds place in the list of properties couered_ by ctauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 22-A, to apply for its deletion from the ' 2o*4 '2016 (r) (\ ALT 272 (DB) ALD 236 (FB) : 20 t-5 SCC OnLine Hvd 407 -7 5 W.P. Xc.36996 of2ul4 list or modiJication thereof, to the concemed authorities as prouided for in the guidelines. TLe concerned autlLoities are obliged to consider the request in proper perspectiue and pass approprtate order within six tueeks from the date of receipt of ttte application and make its copg auailoble to the concerned party."

12. Coming to the case on hand, it is to be noted that since the subject Flat No. 104 is falling in Sy.No.343/ 16 situated at Bandamkommu H/o. Ameenpur village and Mandal, Sangareddy District and as could be seen from the prohibited list placed before this Court the Sy.No.343/ 16 is included in the prohibited list. Further it is also to be noted that as per Endorsement dated l8.Ol.2o2g of the Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Sangareddy District on a copy of Market Value Assistance, in respect of Sy.No.343/ 16 it is endorsed that the scheduled property vide D.No.22136 of 2021 is not prohibited for registration. Since there are contradictory stands taken by the respondents authority, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following order.

13. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions rnade by the learned counsel on either side and following the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, this writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to make an application to the respondents authority seeking for deletion/ modifrcation of the subject property from the prohibited list, within a period of one week from the date of receipt ol a copy of this order and thereafter, it is for the (, rr.P. xo,36996 0f 20;4 \ respondents authorify to corisider the samc and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a pcriod of (06) six weeks, from the date of receipt of such representation. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the casc.

14. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/-L. LAKSHMI BABU ASSSiIHT REGISTRAR / ,TRUE COPY// S ON OFFIC ER to",. Telangana. Hyderabad. ,n" Principal Secretary' Revenue' secretariat' Hyderabad' state 2. The commissioner of stamps and Registration, Government of relangana, 3. The District Registrar' Medak District' Medak' 4. The Sub-Registrar' Patancheru' Medak District' 5. One CC to SRI MIRZA ADNAN AHMED BAIG' Advocate [OPUC] . ;p,;;,g;#f"?,If;1,t'SY3st REGrsrRArroN' Hish court ror the state

7. Two CD CoPies BSR \rr BS I , HIGH COURT DATED: 0610212025 ORDER WP.No.36996 of 2024 it r. ila ;i;t (; I (j 1{ FiB 20ffi (n t' + '.l lio.ATcHEo -a DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION' WITHOUT COSTS 1o co$4 1fr*