K Bhaskar Naidu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K BHASKAR NAIDU, S/O. K.PAPAIAH NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. D.NO.1-2, PULLAIAHGARIPALLE, RANGAMPETA POST,CHANDRAGIRI MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P.

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, A.P. VIJAYAWADA.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶15

THE DISTRICT REGISTER, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATI URBAN.

¶17

THE SUBREGISTRAR, TIRUPATI.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in not deleting the land to an extent of Ac.0.32 cents in Sy.No.254/5Bl of Tirupati Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District from the prohibited properties list, by duly

¶20

2

¶21

considering the representations dated 01.11.2024 and 30.06.2025 and the de-notification letter/ proceedings of the 2nd Respondent No.Ml/19027/35/8/2019 dated 21.08.2019 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith delete the land to an extent of Ac.0.32 cents in Sy.No.254/5Bl of Tirupati Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District from the prohibited properties list and to receive and process the document presented for registration and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to de-notify the land to an extent of Ac.0.32 cents in Sy.No.254/5Bl of Tirupati Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District by considering the representation dated 30.06.2025 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.YASWANTH GADE

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

2.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶29

3.GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS

¶30

The Court made the following:

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Heard Sri K. Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K. M. Krishna Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, Registration and Stamps and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments.

¶33

3

¶34

The instant writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in keeping the subject property under the prohibited category under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Andhra Pradesh Registration Act, 1908.

¶35

Learned Senior Counsel, Sri K. Chidambaram appearing for the petitioner would submit that an extent of Ac.0.39 cents in Sy.No.254/5B of Tirupati Village, Tirupati Urban Mandal, Tirupati District is classified as ‘Patta Dry’ and series of sale transactions have taken place over the subject land. The petitioner’s vendors have purchased the subject property of an extent of 833.8 Sq. Yards vide Doc.No.2225 of 2014 and 822.8 Sq. Yards vide Doc. No.2226 of 2014, dated 09.04.2014. When the sale document is submitted for registration, the then Sub-Registrar refused to register the same on the ground that the same is categorized under prohibited list. In the said regard, the petitioner’s vendor has approached this Court by way of a writ petition. This court directed the sub-registrar to register the document. Pursuant to the same, the Sub-Registrar registered the documents vide document dated 27.12.2018 and 22.03.2019 respectively for a total extent of 1645 Sq. Yards.

¶36

In order to verify the market value of the subject property, the petitioner approached the office of the Sub-Registrar, where he was informed that the subject property is under the prohibited category in terms of the provisions of Sec.22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act,1908. Accordingly, the petitioner made a representation seeking deletion of the subject land from the prohibited category. Upon the said representation, the District Registrar sought clarification from the respondent No.2 whether continue the subject

¶37

4

¶38

property under the prohibited category or delete the same. The petitioner again made another representation, dated 30.06.2025, on the said representation as no orders have been passed, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to delete the subject property from the prohibited category under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, 1908.

¶39

Learned Senior Counsel places reliance on the proceedings, dated 21.08.2019 of the respondent No.2 wherein the 2^nd respondent has directed the respondent No.4 to delete the land of an extent of Ac.0.39 cents, , in Sy.No.254/5B, which includes the subject property from the prohibited category list. Having regard to the same, it is argued that the respondent No.4 should not have entertained any doubt in that regard. However sought for clarification from the respondent No.2 and consequentially, orders have also passed by the District Registrar vide endorsement, dated 24.09.2019. Learned Senior Counsel contends that in the light of the proceedings of the District Registrar, dated 24.09.2019, the Sub-Registrar should not have issued the endorsement with regard to the continuation under prohibited category under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act,1908.

¶40

When the matter has been taken up for consideration today, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, Registration and Stamps would submit that pursuant to the directions of the Commissioner, Endowments Department, dated 21.08.2019, appropriate orders have been passed deleting

¶41

5

¶42

an extent of Ac.0.39 cents in Sy.No.254/5B is classified as patta land and the

¶43

balance Ac.0.32 cents is notified under Prohibited category.

¶44

Vide proceedings, dated 24.09.2019, the Sub-Registrar has endorsed to the effect stating that “ necessary steps have been taken to delete the Sy.Nos.254/2B, 254/5A2, 254/5A4, 254/5B2 and 254/5C in an extent of Ac.1.62 cents and to include the remaining extent of Ac.4.62 cents with its survey numbers and its sub divisions in Sy.No.254 in prohibited property lists of this office. If any document is presented for the registration in the above deleted Survey Numbers necessary action will be taken as per the orders issued in the references cites”.

¶45

Having regard to the said proceedings, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent Nos.4 & 6 to delete the subject property in an extent of Ac.0.32 cents from prohibited category under Section 22A(1)(c) within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

¶46