ORDER :

1. Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by way of this Common Order.

2. In all these writ petitions, the petitioners are one family members i.e., husband, wife and son, as such, related to each other. Assailing the action of the 4th respondent-Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Crime Investigation Department, Hyderabad in issuing letter dated 18.01.2021 to the Sub-registrars of different areas in both the States i.e., State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, directing them not to register the properties belonging to the petitioners, these writ petitions have been filed.

3. Since all these writ petitions are challenging the action of the 4th respondent-Inspector of Police, for the sake of convenience, the facts, in brief, in W.P.No. 28643 of 2021 are taken into consideration, which are as follows:

The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of the properties mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, having purchased the same out of own funds and also out of loans obtained from financial institutions. The petitioner and one Mr.G.Madhusudhan Reddy, have incorporated a company in the name and style of RMS Research Labs Private Limited in the year 2002. However, due to differences, said G.Madhusudhan Reddy lodged a complaint with the Station House Officer, Jinnaram Police Station, Medak District, alleging fraud against the petitioner. As a result of which, the Station House Officer, Jinnaram registered FIR No. 115/2015 on 25.06.2015 under Sections 420, 468 IPC. After filing of the charge sheet, the same is pending as Calender Case No. 533 of 2021 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sangareddy. Challenging the said FIR and charge sheet, the petitioner along with wife and son, who are petitioners in W.P.Nos.28776 and 28799 of 2021, filed W.P.No. 25890 of 2021 on the file of this Court, which is pending adjudication.

4. Mr.G.Madhusudhan Reddy also filed a Company Petition No. 1/59/213/241/HBD/2017 complaining Oppression and Mismanagement on the part of the petitioner claiming various reliefs on the file of National Company Law Tribunal, which is pending adjudication.

5. While things stood thus, when the petitioner was in need of funds for meeting his litigation expenses, he tried to raise funds by mortgaging his properties, the sub-registrars-respondents 5-9 refused to entertain any document stating that there was a direction from the 4th respondent by way of letters dated 18.01.2021, not to accept any document for registration. The petitioner obtained said letters dated 18.01.2021 addressed to the respondents 5-9 separately, under Right to Information Act. The 4th respondent-Inspector of Police, being investigating officer has no power or authority to effect attachment of immovable property of an accused person but he can only seize the property under Section 102 of the Code. It is further stated that the respondents 5 to 9 have no authority to act upon the letters issued by the 4th respondent and include his properties in the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act of 1908’). The procedure envisaged under Section 22-A of the Act of 1908 has not been followed for placing the subject properties under the list of prohibited properties, as such, same is illegal and arbitrary.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. It is an admitted fact that a case in Cr.No. 115/2015 under Sections 420, 406, 477(A), 464, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120(B) of Indian penal Code has been registered against the petitioners. During the course of investigation, the 4th respondent-Inspector of Police, being investigating officer, wrote letters to the respondents-Sub-Registrars of different areas in the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, where the properties of the petitioners are located, directing the