ORDER :

The petitioner seeks writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 to 4 to delete the petitioner’s properties from the prohibitory list maintained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act and further direct the respondent No.4 to receive, register and release the documents presented by the petitioner for registration.

2. As can be seen, it is the 3rd round of litigation. Succinctly stating, originally the subject property in an extent of Ac.0.97 cents in Sy.No.504; Ac.1.00 cents in Sy.No.506/1; Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.495/2; Ac.0.39 cents in Sy.No.506/3 and Ac.1.85 cents in Sy.No.491/2 totaling Ac.6.21 cents of Peddapalli Village, Siddavatam Mandal of Kadapa District was assigned in favour of the petitioner. She mortgaged the subject property to Kadapa District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kadapa and when she committed default, the bank initiated recovery proceedings under the provisions of A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and award No.2036/2005-2006, dated 02.02.2006 was passed and the said award was put in execution vide E.P.No.419/2005-2006. In the public auction the petitioner’s husband M. Nageswar Reddy purchased the subject property and sale certificate dated 17.07.2006 was issued in his favour.

3. While so, when the said M. Nageswar Reddy, proposed to transfer the subject property to 3rd parties, the registration authorities refused to receive and register the document on the ground that the Tahsildar sent a list of assigned lands to Registration Department and subject property is covered by the said list and hence registration cannot be effected. Aggrieved, the petitioner’s husband filed WP No.10934/2012 in the Common High Court of A.P. which was disposed of by order dated 07.04.2012 as follows:

“The only reason mentioned by the 2nd respondent in the letter communicated to the 3rd respondent is that the lands are shown as assigned in the relevant records. It is no doubt true that the lands are assigned at one point of time and that Section 22-A of the Registration Act as amended through Act 19 of 2007 prohibits registration of documents pertaining to assigned lands. However, the lands were mortgaged in favour of the Kadapa District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Kadapa and once they were brought to sale, they loose the character of assigned lands. Such transactions are exempted under Section 6 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. In W.P.No.14750 of 2007, this Court took the view that once an assigned land was brought to sale by a Cooperative Bank, the prohibition contained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act does not apply for them. The same was upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.950 of 2007.

Hence, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.”

4. Pursuant to the said order M. Nageswar Reddy executed gift deed dated 25.03.2013 in favour of the petitioner in respect of the subject property. When the petitioner applied for mutation of her name in the revenue records, the Tahsildar, Siddavatam Mandal accordingly mutated all lands but Ac.1.85 cents in Sy.No.491/2. On her representation, the Mandal Surveyor inspected the land in an extent of Ac.3.44 cents 491/2 and submitted report to the Tahsildar stating that the petitioner is in possession of Ac.1.87 cents in Sy.No.491/2. Even then the Tahsildar did not take action to mutate her name in respect of the aforesaid property. The petitioner’s representation to the RDO, Rajampet also did not yield fruitful results. Hence the petitioner filed W.P.No.11049/2017 before the Common High Court of Andhra Pradesh. A learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition on 28.03.2017 and directed the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry pursuant to the notice dated 05.01.2017 and take action in accordance with law. Pursuant to the said direction, the 5th respondent herein conducted enquiry and mutated petitioner’s name in all the revenue records and issued pattadar passbook and title deed.

5. Now c