Point of law: A person being a special Commissioner is not competent to discharge the duties of Commissioner of Endowments. Undisputedly, the Commissioner is working and the post of Commissioner is not kept vacant as on the date of issue of such letter.

ORDER :

1. Writ Petition No.8704 of 2021 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of the 1st respondent contained in Lr.In.Rc.No.L1/COE-18023 (36)/1/2021 -L SEC – ENDOWMENTS, dated 09.04.2021 addressed to the 6th respondent requesting that the lands in Sy.Nos.44/1, 46 and 51 of Mamidilova village, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District be placed in the prohibitory register under Section 22A (1) (c) of Registration Act 1908, is arbitrary, without jurisdiction and ultra-virus the provisions of the Registration Act and also contradictory to the judgment of the State Government contained in Memo dated 10.10.2019 and consequently set aside the said letter of the 1st respondent dated 09.04.2021 and direct the respondents - registration authorities i.e. Sub-Registrar, District Registrar to entertain and register the sale deeds in respect of the lands/buildings/constructions in Sy.No.44/1, 46 and 51 of Mamidilova village, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District (which may be executed and presented by the petitioners in favour of the third parties) and release the same after due registration”

2. The factual matrix in the petition is as follows:

3. Petitioner Nos.1 to 9 and petitioner No.11 are the absolute owners and possessors of the subject land situated in Sy.Nos.44/1, 46 and 51 of Mamidilova Village, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and the names of the petitioners are already entered in the revenue records as pattadars and possessors. Petitioner No.10 has entered into a development agreement with petitioner Nos.1 to 9 vide document No.1909 of 2017, dated 23.05.2017, No.2718 and 2719 of 2017, dated 06.06.2017 which were captioned as Development Agreement – cum - General Power of Attorney. Petitioner No.11 obtained registered sale bearing document No.1354 of 2017 deed dated 15.04.2017 from the original owners and pattadars. Thus, the petitioners have applied for grant of layout permission from Visakhpatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority (for short “VMRDA”) and layout has been approved vide layout No.30/2019/1167/VMRDA/GPMS, dated 21.11.2019 for conversion of the land into plots and similar layout has been granted to petitioner No..1 vide layout permit No.67 of 2018. Petitioner Nos.1 to 9 and 11 are carrying on the developmental activity in accordance with the layout sanctioned by the VMRDA. Petitioners got the land converted for non-agriculture purpose under the A.P. Conversion of Agricultural Land into Non-Agricultural Purpose Act, 2006. As such, the petitioners are entitled to develop the land in accordance with the layout permission granted by the Urban Development Authority.

4. There was an issue with regard to the title of the land since there was a claim over the land by one Grama Devatha by name Vanamulamma Devatha. In that context, the dispute stood resolved as per the decision of the Government contained in the memo dated 10.10.2019 wherein the State Government has set aside the orders of the Settlement Officer and Joint Collector and upheld the earlier orders of the Joint Collector dated 30.07.2016 and the said decision of the state Government is not challenged in any superior forum and hence it has attained finality. Thus, it is clear that the petitioners have valid title, obtained valid layout permission and conversion of land use, so that they can lawfully proceed with the development activity over the subject land in Sy.Nos.44/1, 46 and 51 of Mamidilova Village, Anandapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

5. While things stood thus, State issued another memo dated 03.12.2019 purporting to reopen the case which is covered by the memo dated 10.10.2019, thereupon petitioners filed W.P.No.21412 of 2019, this Court was pleased to grant interim order keeping the said memo in