THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.905 OF 2021

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

“… to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not registering the property bearing Plot No.33 in Sy.Nos.68, 72, 73 and 74 admeasuring 369 sq. yards/308.85 sq. mtrs with built up area of 3500 sq.ft in Sarvasukhi Society, West Marredpally, Secunderabad by declaring G.O.M.S.No.609, dated 18-08-2004 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the provisions of law and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to register the document presented by petitioners pertaining to the property bearing Plot No.33 in Sy.Nos.68, 72, 73 and 74 admeasuring 369 sq. yards/308 85 sq. mtrs with built up area of 3500 sq. ft in Sarvasukhi Society, West Marredpally, Secunderabad release the same and pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case”.

2. Heard Ms. D.Pramada, learned counsel representing Mr. D.Devender Rao, learned counsel for petitioners and Ms. D.Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the property admeasuring 369 sq. yards/308.85 sq. mtrs. with built up area of 3500 sq. ft. in Sarvasukhi Society, West Marredpally, Secunderabad, was inherited by petitioners’

vendors one D. Vinod Reddy and Smt. D.Kausalya Reddy, by virtue of a Will Deed dated 10.11.1981 vide Document No.82/81, dated 10.11.1981.

4. It is submitted that petitioners entered into an agreement of sale with their vendors on 31.12.2020 and paid part sale consideration to get the sale deed executed and presented the same before respondent No.3 (Sub Registrar, Bowenpally) for registration. That respondent No.3 refused to register the document on the ground that a part of property in question is falling in Sy.Nos.74 and 73, was included in the prohibited list from registration. That the Tahsildar, Marredpally Mandal, by letter dated 23.07.2007 informed that Sy.No.74 forms part of Government Land and any parcel of land falling in Sy.No.74 was prohibited from registration.

5. It is submitted that Government vide Gazette Notification Part-I, Extra Ordinary bearing No.269, dated 19.06.2000 prohibited the registration of documents with respect to lands in Sy.Nos.74 and 73 of Marredpally Village as opposed to public policy under Section 22A of Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act, 1908’). That another Gazette Notification No.349 dated 30.08.2004 was issued on the basis of the proposal of the District Collector, Hyderabad, vide letter No.C3/1712/2004 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.609, Revenue(Regn-I) Department, dated

18.08.2004 under Section 22A of the Act, 1908.

6. It is submitted that Government of the then Andhra Pradesh State amended Section 22A of the Act, 1908 that the state in the Gazette Notification Part-I, Extra Ordinary bearing No.352 dated 20.06.2007 appointed “20.06.2007” as the date from which the Registration (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2007 shall come into force.

7. It is submitted that no fresh notification has been issued pursuant to Andhra Pradesh Amendment Act, 2007. It is contended by learned counsel that G.O.Ms.No.609 dated 18.08.2004 issued prior to the amendment of Section 22A is not valid after the state amendment of the Registration Act, 2007.

8. It is primary grievance of the petitioner that a fresh notification was not issued and proceedings issued prior to the amendment not to register documents presented in Sy.Nos.74 and 73 cannot be sustained. It is pointed out that the Collector being a statutory authority, registering authority is not bound by the proceedings of Collector, but bound by the Act. That a G.O. issued prior to amendment cannot be held to be a valid G.O. and refusing the registration under the shelter of an old Act, which stood amended is impermissible.

9. It is brought to the notice