Allowed

G Padmavathi v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Nov 2020WP/20706/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the inclusion of Ex-Serviceman assigned land in the prohibited list after 10 years. It directed the respondent to register the sale deed as the No Objection Certificate dispensation under G.O.Ms.No.279 dated 04.07.2016 was applicable.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 5th respondent to receive, register and release the sale deed forthwith in accordance with the Registration Act, 1908.

G Padmavathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20706 OF 2020

¶3

ORDER:-

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 and 4 in including the petitioner’s land in an extent of Ac.5.00 cents situated in Sy.No. 337/1A of Chindepalli Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District in the prohibited properties list and the consequential action of the 5^th respondent in refusing to entertain the sale deed for registration stating that the land is included in the prohibited properties list as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Judgment of this Court in W.A.No. 147 of 2017 dated 29.08.2019 and G.O.Ms.No.279 Revenue (Assignment 1) Department, dated 04.07.2016.

¶5

The Case of the petitioner is that the land an extent of Ac.5.00 cents situated in Sy.No. 337/1A of Chindepalli Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District was assigned in favour of husband of the petitioner under Ex-Serviceman category vide No. DKT No. 126/4/1406, dated 30.06.1997. The Revenue authorities had granted Pattadar Pass Book and Title Deed in favour of husband of the petitioner and his name is also duly mutated in all revenue records. Thereafter, the husband of the petitioner intended to alienate the property made an application before the then Tahsildar for grant of NOC and same was granted on 29.01.2012. Recently, the husband of the petitioner died on 06.09.2020. After death of husband of the petitioner for her family necessities intended to alienate the property and approached the 5^th respondent to furnish the market value certificate, who refused to issue the same as the subject land was included in the prohibited

¶6

¶7

properties list as “Assigned Land” as per the list submitted by respondents 2 and 4.

¶8

The petitioner intends to sell the property to an extent of Ac.5.00 cents situated in Sy.No. 337/1A of Chindepalli Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District to third parties. The husband of the petitioner and after him, the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the subject property.

¶9

The petitioner approached the 5^th respondent for valuation certificate, who refused to issue the same on the ground that the subject land is included in the prohibited properties list as assigned land. The subject land was assigned under Ex-Serviceman quota and free from prohibition for alienation by 29.06.2007, after 10 years of assignment, as per the G.O.Ms.No.1117 of Revenue (Assignment) Department, dated 11.11.1993 and as the land was assigned to Ex-Serviceman, there is no need to get NOC as per Government orders. The 5^th respondent without following the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.279 dated 04.07.2016 and insisting for fresh NOC from the District Collector as per G.O.Ms.No.307, dated 06.06.2013 for registration of the document, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence this present Writ Petition is filed.

¶10

Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the husband of the petitioner got the property in an extent of Ac.5.00 cents situated in Sy.No. 337/1A of Chindepalli Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District, which was assigned to Ex-Serviceman, by G.O.Ms.No.279, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 04.07.2016, the Government dispensed with the grant of No Objection Certificate in case of assignment of land to Ex-Servicemen and Freedom Fighters, where 10 years

¶11

¶12

period has elapsed from the date of assignment. Hence, the refusal to entertain the sale deed for registration stating that the subject land is included in the prohibitory lands list is arbitrary and illegal.

¶13

Learned counsel further submits that earlier in similar set of circumstances, the common High Court and this Court passed orders in W.P.No.23523 of 2016, dated 27.07.2016, W.P.No.12835 of 2016 dated 01.09.2016 and W.P.No.1135 of 2019, dated 29.03.2019 and that W.A.No.147 of 2019 filed assailing the order in WP.No.1135 of 2019 was also dismissed vide judgment, dated 29.03.2019. He prayed to pass similar order in this writ petition also.

¶14

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of both the counsel and in view of the earlier orders passed by the common High Court and this Court, and the settled legal position, this court found that in view of the G.O.Ms.No. 279 dated 04.07.2016, wherein the Government had dispensed with the grant of No Objection Certificate in case of assignment of land to the Ex-Serviceman and Freedom Fighters, where 10 years period has elapsed from the date of assignment and keeping in view of the ratio in the decision in M. Ramakrishna Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh¹ which permits alienation of assigned land by an Ex-serviceman after expiry of 10 years. The action of the 5^th respondent in refusing to receive, register and release the document is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of Registration Act. Hence, the 5^th respondent is directed to receive, register and release the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the land an extent of Ac.5.00 cents situated in Sy.No. 337/1A of Chindepalli Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District

¶15

1 2016(6) ALT 755

¶16

¶17

forthwith, if the same is otherwise in order, in accordance with the

¶18

Rules framed under the Registration Act, 1908.

¶19

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶20

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶21

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

¶22

also stand closed.

¶23

__________________________ JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO

Date: 09.11.2020

Cbs/ KK

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.20706 OF 2019

¶29

Date: 09.11.2020

¶30

Cbs/KK

G Padmavathi v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G Padmavathi v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mediboina Jagadeswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Narayanadri Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs Apspdcl

P.Venkata Subba Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chintamani Peta Subba Narasimha Rao Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Yarralagadda Siva Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Bathini Naganna Vs Southern Power Distribution Company of a.P.Limited