IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that land cannot be classified as prohibited under Section 22-A without proper Gazette notification, allowing registration of sale deeds.

ORDER:

Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri Vedula Venkataraman appearing for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the material made available on the record. With the consent of both the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the threshold.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring that the subject land admeasuring Acs.9.36 guntas in Sy.No.51 of Gandhamguda village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which was earlier included in the list of prohibited properties under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, cannot be continued/construed as hit by Section 22-A of the Registration Act in view of the judgment of the Special Tribunal in ST/D1/B/915/2018/2021, dated 10.12.2021 and the mutation granted in favour of the petitioners in terms of the entries contained in the Dharani webportal and consequently delete the subject land from the list of prohibitory properties under Section 22-A of the Registration Act for the reasons that there is no Gazette publication of the subject lands under Section 22-A of the Registration Act and direct the 5th respondent, Tahsildar, to entertain and register the sale deeds that may be executed and presented by the petitioners without raising an objection that the subject land is covered by Section 22-A of the Registration Act for the reason that there is no Gazette notification in which the subject lands are included as prohibited under Section 22-A of the Registration Act and release the registered documents to the petitioners or their power of attorney holder.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the absolute owners and possessors of all that subject land admeasuring Acs.9.36 guntas in Sy.No.51 of Gandhamguda village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (hereinafter referred to as ‘the subject property’) and they were granted mutation by the Court of Special Tribunal, Ranga Reddy District in Case No.ST/D1/B/915/2018/2021 dated 10.12.2021 and also mutated their names as the Pattadars and possessors in the Dharani Webportal in respect of the subject property vide Kata No.60170 and the nature of the land is described as private patta land. Thus the order dated 10.12.2021 of the Special Tribunal has clearly stated that the subject land held by the Jagirdar Mohammed Mazheruddin is declared as private patta land and it can no more be continued as Government land.

4. It is further submitted that prior to the said order dated 10.12.2021 of the Special Tribunal, the 4th respondent, District Collector had addressed a letter dated 10.06.2021 to the 3rd respondent, District Registrar to the effect that the subject land is placed in the prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act as Government land but in view of the order dated 10.12.2021 of the Special Tribunal, the nature of the land has been decided to be private patta land and hence it no longer can be construed as continuing in the prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act.

5. It is further submitted that the petitioners earlier filed W.P. No.3195 of 2024 questioning the action of the 5th respondent, Tahsildar, in not entertaining to register the sale deeds executed and presented by the petitioners in respect of the subject land and this Court vide its order dated 07.02.2024 disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the 5th respondent, Tahsildar, to consider the online application bearing No.2400058947 dated 01.01.2024 submitted by the petitioners to entertain and register the sale deeds that may be executed and presented by the petitioners in respect of the subject land and release the sale deeds in accordance with the Registration Act and Stamps Act within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. But, thereafter, in pursuance to the order dated 07.02.2024 passed in W.P. No.3195 of 2024 by this Court, the 5th respondent, Tahsildar, vide impugned endorsement in Fi