A registering authority has no statutory power to cancel or annul a document once it has been duly registered under the Registration Act, 1908; such relief must be sought through a competent Civil Court.

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed assailing the action of the respondent No.1 in not cancelling the sale deed dated 19.04.2012 registered as Document No.5558, whereby an extent of Ac.2.20 guntas of land in Sy.No.266/1 situated at Chittojipally village, Chegunta Mandal, Medak District was sold by respondent No.5 in favour of respondent No.6, as arbitrary.

2. The Petitioner submits that her late husband, Sri Venkata Kishan Rao, was the owner and possessor of Maktha Inam land admeasuring Ac.718.03 guntas situated in Sy.No.266/1 of Chittojipalli Village, Chengunta Mandal. Out of the said extent, he voluntarily donated Ac.400.00 to the Bhoodan Yagna Board, retaining the remaining extent of Ac.320.00 for himself. It is further submitted that the Bhoodan Yagna Board, by proceedings dated 18.01.1960, allotted the said extent of Ac.320.00 comprising hill area covered with trees, to Lord Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Ibrahimpatnam. In addition, the Board distributed Ac.70.00 of land to landless poor persons. Subsequently, the petitioner’s husband filed a declaration under the provisions of the A.P. Agricultural Land Ceilings Act . In the Appeal preferred before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, it was held that the extent of Ac.320.00 belongs to Lord Venkateswara Swamy Temple, and that the petitioner's husband was serving as the Hereditary Trustee of the said temple.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that respondent No.5 is her step-son, being the son of her late husband through his first wife, and that he is not of sound mind. It is alleged that one Sri P.V. Kamalakar Rao, S/o Venkateswara Rao, created a General Power of Attorney purportedly executed by respondent No.5 in his favour and, on the strength of the said GPA, filed applications before the respondent No.3 seeking grant of Occupancy Rights Certificates (ORCs) in favour of Lord Venkateswara Swamy Temple, Ibrahimpatnam, in respect of Ac.320.00 of land, and further requesting that ORC be granted in favour of the petitioner for the remaining extent.

4. It is further averred by petitioner that respondent No.3, however, erroneously held that there was no record to establish that Ac.300.00 of land was allotted by the Bhoodan Yagna Board in favour of Lord Venkateswara Swamy Temple, and consequently passed orders holding that the successors of the petitioner's late husband were entitled for grant of ORC only to an extent of Ac.39.37 guntas in Sy.No.266/1, being the balance land remaining after surrendering the land under the Agricultural Land Ceiling proceedings.

5. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner herein and respondent No.5 preferred an appeal before the respondent No.2, who in turn, erroneously held that the prayer of both the petitioner and respondent No.5 for grant of ORC in favour of Lord Venkateswara Swamy Temple could not be considered, and that ORC in respect of the balance extent of Ac.39.37 guntas shall be granted to the successors of late Sri Venkata Kishan Rao. However, Respondent No.2 directed the petitioner and respondent No.5 to approach the respondent No.3 for grant of ORC after determination of their inter se rights by a competent forum.

6. Thereafter, in the Revision filed by the petitioner before respondent No.2, it was directed that the Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds issued in favour of the respondent No.5 shall stand cancelled until ORCs are obtained in accordance with law.

7. Aggrieved by the said order of respondent No.2, the respondent No.5 filed W.P.No.910 of 2012, wherein this Co