Allowed

Smt Sunkari Shyamala and another v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Telangana HC14 Aug 2024WP/18833/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought mandamus directing registration of a sale deed refused by the Sub-Registrar citing Section 22-A prohibitory notifications. Following the court's common order dated 22.03.2024 in similar writ petitions, the writ petition was allowed; the interim condition against further conveyance was recalled and records directed to be changed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed in terms of common order dated 22.03.2024; interim condition on further conveyance recalled; registering authorities to make necessary changes in records; no costs.

Smt Sunkari Shyamala and another Vs The State of… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^325s 1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N,V.SHRAVAN^KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:^'18833 oF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 Smt Sunkari Shyamala and another, Wo S. Srinivas,^{Aged about} Q,Veqrq, Occ. House Wif6, R/o H.No.6-125, Gundlapochampally, Quthbullapur^Mandal, Medchal-lVlalkajgiri District.

¶9

2 Smt Sunkari Ldtna, Wo S. Madhusudan,^{Aged about 28 Years, Oc9, Housg} Wife, R/o H.No.5-351, Suraram Colony, Quthbullapur^{Mandal,Medchal-} Malkajgiri District

¶10

...pETrroNERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana Rep. by its^{PrincipalSecretary (Revenue),} Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Diskict Registrar, Medchal- Malkajgiri^District.

¶14

The Sub Registar, Qutbullapur, Medchal^{- Malkajgiri Diskict.}

¶15

The Collector, lvledchal - tt/alkajgiri^District.

¶16

The Tahasildar, Quthbullapur Mandal,^{Medchal-ltilalkajgiriDistrict.}

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith,the High Court may be} pleased to issue writ, order or direction more^{particularly one in the nature of} Writ of Mandamus declaring the^{action of the 3rd respondenti.e., The Sub} Registrar, Quthbullapur, Medchal -^{tvlalkajgiri District, in refusing to receive and} register the sale Deed^{presented by the petitionersin respect of Housebearing} No. 05-351, with a^plinth area^{of 896.0 Sq-Feet (180.05f1(RCC)and7160 Sft} (ACC), on plot No.561 (Old No.265), admesuring^{142.0 Sq.Yards, in Survey} No.1 07, situated at Suraram^{Colony of Suraram Village, QuthbullapurMandal,} Medchal-Malkajgiri District, basing on^{prohibitory list under section 22-A of} Registration Act as^per the^'l .^{Ranga Reddy District GazetteNotification} R.R.No.83, communrcated by Joint^{Collector, Ranga Reddy vide File} No.E5/4730i 2013/Quthbullapur/^{Nizampet. dated2510912013' 2Deputy}

¶19

i i' I iir

¶20

collector and rar-rasirdar euthbuilapur Mandar, Fire No 8rs83r2012, dated 17r02r2012 and 3 Gazette Notification No 134, dated 1oro3r2oo5 and G o Ms No 2g2 Revenue (Registration. r), 9th March 2005 communicated by Commissioner an. lnspector General (R and S), Hyderabad vide File No G l/4661/200s Dr o2ro712005, is iilegar, arbitrary, in vioration of Articres 14, 21 and 300-4 of constitution of India and arso in vioration of Registration Act, 1908, besides in vioration of principres of Naturar Justice and consequenfly direct the respondent no. r| herein to receive and register the sare Deed presented by the petitioners, in respect of the House bearrng No. 05-35i, with a printh area of 896.0 Sq.Feet (180 Osft (RCC) and 7.16.0 Sft (ACC), on ptot No.S61 (Otd No.265), admesuring^.142.0 Sq.yards, in Survey No 107, situated at Suraram colony of suraram /irage, euthburapur Mandar. Irrredchar-Markajqiri District.

¶21

lA NO: 1 oF 2021

¶22

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondent no.3 herein to receive and register the Sale Deed presented by the petitioners in respect of House bearing No. 05_351 , with a plinth area of 896,0 Sq.Feet (iB0 0sft (RCC; and 716.0 Sft (ACC), on ptot No 561 (old No 265) admesuring 142.0 Sq.yards, in survey No.107, situated at suraram corony of {iuraram Virage, Quthburapur Mandar, Medchar-Markajgiri District, pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶23

Counsel for the petitioner: SRl. KATIKA RAVTNDER REDDY counsel for the Respondents: AGp FoR srAMps AND REGrsrRATroN

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶26

W.P. No.18833 of 2O2l

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This writ petition has been filed challenging the action of^the Registering Authorities in refusing to register^{the subject documentsbased} on the Gazette Notihcation R.R. No.83, dated^25.09.2O13.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that^{the subject} matter of this writ petition is squarely^{covered by the common orderdated} 22.03.2024 passed in W.P. Nos.9645^{of 2O2land W.P. No.26353 of 2O23} by this Court. The learned counsel^{would furthersubmitthat this Court,} while granting interim order dated^{2a.O4.2O21in W.P. No.9645 of 2O2l had} stipulated a condition not to^resort to^{further conveyanceof the subject} property without leave of this Court and^{similarly in W.P. No.26353of 2023} this Court, while^{grantinginterim order dated 22-09.2023,had prohibited} the parties from^proceeding with^{further conveyance of the propertyexcept} on obtaining required^{permission from this Court.}

¶30

It is further submitted that in^{the presentwrit petition this Court,} while granting interim order dated^{17.O8.2O21,had directed the Registering} authorities to register the^{subject documentswith one of the conditionsthat} petitioner is directed not to resort to^{further conveyanceof the subject} property without leave of this Court.^{Subsequently, in pursuance of said} interim order, the Registering^{authorities have registered the subject} documents and as on^{today, on behalf of the respondents/ Registering} authority no counter^{hasbeen lited.}

¶31

¶32

,.1

¶33

On the o ther hand , the learned Assistant Government^plead appearing for the Stamps and Registration did not dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶34

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused rhe material made availablc orr record.

¶35

At this juncture, it is signil-rcant to note that the Division Bench of this court vide its corrmon order dateci 19.1o.2o23 passed in w.p. No.2g30o of 2oo7 and batch had dealt with the validity of section 22-A of the Act as incorporated in the Registration Act, 1908 and the Amended Act, 19 of 2oo7 with effect from 2r).06.2007 and had upheld the validity of the Section 22-A of the Act.

¶36

Having gone through the material made available on the record and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, it is essential and necessary to excerpt the relevant para Nos.23 to 32 of the common order dated 22.03.2024 passed in w.p. Nos.9645 of 2o2l and 26353 of 2023 by 1.his Court, which reads as under:

¶37

"23. From a perusal of the Notification in R.R. No.83, dated 23.Og.2Ol3, the subject lands were notihed under Section 22-A (l)(a) for the purpose of Section 22-Ai1). It is only a notice given inviting objections ind suggestions or the above proposal from all persons who are likely to be affected thereb), for berng taken into consideration by the Government. The details of the properties mentioned in the annexure states that the subject lands are Government lalds.

¶38

Section 122-A (1) (e) of the Act mani{ests that any documents or class of documents pertaining to the properties, the State Government may, by notification prohibit the registration in which avor.ved or accrued rnterests of Central ancL State Govemments, Local Bodies, Dducational, Oultural,

1 \

&.ri t'

Religious and Charitable^{lnstitutions, those attachedby Civil'Criminal'} Revenue Courts and^{Directand Indirect TaxLaws and others which are} likely to adversely^{affect theseinterest'}

¶43

Section 22-A^{(2) readsas under}

¶44

"(21 For^{the purpose of Ctause(e) of sub-section(1), the State} Government shall^{publisha notification after obtaining reasonsfor and} full description^{ofpropertiesfurnished by theDistrictCollectors} concerned in^{the manneras may be prescribed"}

¶45

It is pertinent^{to notethat in the case of Vinjamuri Rajagopala} Chary {Supra)^{paras156 hadsummarizedandissueddirections As per} the Clause^(v) no^{notificationis contemplatedunder sub-section (2) of} Section 22-A with^{respectto the propertiesfalling underctauses (a) to (d)} of sub-section⁽¹⁾ of^{Section22-A.As per Clause (vi),the properties} covered under clause^{(e) of Section 22 A shatl be notifred in the official} GazetteofthestateGovernmentsandshallbeforwarded,alongwiththe list of properties,^{and a copyof the relevant notification/Gazette'to the} concemed^{registeringauthorities under the provisions of Registration Act} and shall also^{place the saidnotification/Gazetteon the websites of both} the State^Governments.

¶46

The subject lands^{in thesewrit petitions as Perthe Notificationin} R.R.No.83 in File^{No.E5/4730120131Q uthbuapur/ Quthbullapur'dated} 25.Og.2O13, which^{accordingto the District Collector wereclassiltedas} Govemment lands^{and aNotiltcationwas issued callingfor} objections/ suggestions^{beforeptacing for prohibitionssection 22-A(1) (e)} and (2) stipulates^{that ifany tand isclassified and determined as} Government^{land,the Government shall publish an ofhcialGazette} notification after^{obtainingreasonsfor andfutl descriptionof properties} furnished^by the^{DistrictCollector concerned in the manner as prescribed'} In the case on^{hand, the respondents have not foltowed theprovisionsof} Section 22-A(I)(e)(2)^{andthe guidelines issuedby the Fult Bench in the} case of Vinjamuri^{RajagoPalaChary(Supra) whereinat para 156 held} that the auttrorities^{are obliged to fotlow ctause (vi) for those properties} covered under^{Clause(e) of Section 22-Aof the Act, wherebysuch lands} have to be notified^{in the officialGazette of the State The Notihcation in} R.R.No.83dated25.Og.2Ol3communicatedbytheJointCollector'Ranga Reddy vide File^{No.ES/4730/20 13 / Quthbu apur/ Quthbultapur' dated} 25.09.2013; Deputy Collector^{and Tahasildhar, Quthbullapur Mandal'File}

No.B/533/2012, d,ated lT_O2.2O12 and the Gazette Notificatron No.t34, dated I 0.O:i. 2005 and G.O.Ms. No.292, Revenue (Registration_t), gdr March 20O5 communicated by the Commissioner and Inspector General (Revenue 8r Stamps), Hyderabad vide File No.Gl 14661 /2005, dated O2.O7.2OO5 are not in accordance with the provisions of the Scction 22_A (1) (e) and 2:2 (1)(21 and also as per Clause (vi) of thc guidehnes rssued in the case of Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary (Supra) and the same cannot be the basis for clenying for registration of the subject properties.

¶51

..,1.l

¶52

a7 Further the Tahsildar vide Fite No.B/5a3/2012, dated 12.O2.2012 had notifie<l the particular property as the Government land and requested the Sub-Registrar not to register any deed of conveyance The District Collector on 2S.09.2013 had issued preliminary notification calling for objections and the said notilication was found to be dclective by this Court in W.p. No.19069 of 2Ot4 d,ated 25.O8.2Ot4.

¶53

2a It is alsro pertinent to note that in the counter fired in w.p_ No.26353 of 2023 prohibiting transfer/registration that subsequent to the Notihcation in R.R. No.g3 dated 25-O9.2O13 the ansu,ering respondents have not tal:en any steps in notifying in the ofrrcial Gazette of state Governmsnl rn terms of the guideline No.(vi) issued b,v thc Full Bench in the casc of Viujamud Rajagopala Chary (Supra).

¶54

As such, the Notilication in R_R.No.g3 in File No.Ir5,r473O/2r 13/ Quthbullapur/ Quthbullapur, ciated 25.09.2013, is onl-y a notice given for inviting objections and suggestions and this cannot be the basis for refusal for reBistration of the subject properties. In view of the same, Gazette Notlfication in R.R. No.g3, dated 25.Og.2O13, communrcated by the Joint Cotlector, Ranga Reddy vide File No.ES/4230/2013/ Quthbullapur/,cajularamaram, dated 2S.O9.20 13, 2) Deputy Co[ector & Talsildar Quthbultapur Mandal, File No.B l Sa3 l 20 12, dated 1Z.O2.2O 12 and the cazette Notihcation No.134, dated 10.03.2005 and G.O.Ms.No.291l, dated 09.03.2005 are not in consonance to the provisions of Section 22-A, of tine Registration Act, 1908 and 22A(.1)(e) and Clause (vil of the guidelirres and the same cannot be referred for the purpose of denying regist|ation of the subject propertres. Consequen y, reference made vide in f ile No. ES/473OI 20 13/ euthbullapur/Gajulararnara m, and File No. E5l47 3ol2o l 3 /'euthbuuapur/euthbullapur, dated 25..g.2or3 and File No.B/Ii83/2ef2 dated t7.O2.2O12 of the .t_ahsitdar, euthbullapur

\ \

'-...i

Mandal, are declared as illegal, arbitrary and bad in law and are^hereby set aside.

¶60

Accordingly, W.P. Nos.9645 of 2O2l ar.d 26353 of 2023 are allowed-

¶61

This Court on 22.09.2023, while directing the Registering authority to receive and process the document without^reference to the letter^dated 17.02.2012, and the Notification in R.R. No.83 dated 25.09.2013,^had directed the petitioner not to resort to further conveyance of the^subject property without leave of this Court. In this regard, it is^made clear that since these writ petitions^(W.P. Nos.9645 of 2O2l^ar.d.26353 of^{20231 ate} allowed, the condition that was imPosed to the^effect that^{not to resort to} further conveyance of the subject^property is hereby^recalled. The Registering Authorities are directed to^{make necessary changesin the} records.

¶62

It is made clear that mere registration of the document^{does not} confer title on the subject^property and it is^{also made clear that thisorder} would not have any bearing on all those matters^{wheretitle/rightsof the} parties are pending before the authorities either in revision/appeals^for adjudication aIId in any other^case this^{order also doesnot preclude the} parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court^oflaw. There shall be no order as to costs."

¶63

Since the issues involved in^{this writ petitionare similarto thosethat} have been considered by this Court in^{the commonorder dated ZZ.OIS.ZO2+} e passed in W.P. Nos.9645 of 2O2l ar,d^{26353 of 2023 and for the reasons} alike, this writ petition is allowed in^{terms of the common order dated} 22.03.2024 passed in W.P.^{Nos.9645 of 2O2l and 26353 of 2023by this} Court.

¶64

It is made clear that in^{the present writ petition this Court,} while granting the interim^{order dated17.o8.2o21,the condition stipulated} that the petitioner is directed^{not to resort to further conveyanceof the} subject property without^{leave of this Court ishereby recalledand}

¶65

¶66

consequently, th(l Registering authorities are directed to rnake nece

¶67

',::.^]

¶68

changes in the rer:ords. There shall be no order as to costs

¶69

As a seque[, miscellaneous applications, if any pendrng, shall stand

¶70

closcd.

¶71

SD/- K. VENKAIAH ASSISTANT EGISTRAR

¶72

//TRUE COPY/'

¶73

SEC ION OFFICER

¶74

To, 1 The Princioal Secretary (Revenue), Secretariat. T'S''Hyderabad'

¶75

The Districi^{Registrar, Medchal- Malkajgiri} Qistrict

¶76

The Sub Regisiar, Qutbullapur,^{Mgd-c.hal - Malkajgiri District'} 4. The Collector', li,ledchal^{- MalkajgiriDistrict.} S. f ne f anasitd ar, Quthbullapu^{r lviandal,Medchal-MalkajgirlD,lslrlgt} O One CC to SRI^{KATIKA RnV|TOERREDDYAdvocate[OPU-C]} 7 i; ccsio cP FoR STAMPS^{ANDREGlsrRATloN ,High court for the} State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶77