Allowed

Sri. Kasimahanthi Kishor Kumar Patnaik v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Telangana HC13 Aug 2024WP/2536/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the refusal to register documents based on defective notifications violating Section 22-A of the Registration Act, the High Court held that the order was illegal and quashed the refusal to register.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed, the refusal orders were set aside, and the Registering Authorities were directed to register the documents.

Sri. Kasimahanthi Kishor Kumar Patnaik Vs The State of… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32s5 ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETTTION NO:2 536 0F 202.t

¶7

Between:

¶8

sri' Kasimahanthi Kishor Kumar pa{naik, S/o: Krishna chander patnaik. Aoed about 35 years. occ. Busineii,- ny"^{-n.N".i_io!,-'ii;iiprirv,",ii"r.,il} Saravakota, Dharmalakshmipuram, drika"t-ulam.''"''' "'

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telanoana. Rep. by its principal Secretary (Revenue), Secretariat, HyderJbad.'

¶12

2 The district Registrar, Medchat- Malkaigiri District.

¶13

The Sub Regislrar, euthbullapur. Medchal _ lr,lalkajgiri District.

¶14

4 The Coilecto:., Medchal - tvlalkajgi.i District.

¶15

5 The Tahasildar, Outhbullapur Mandal, IVledchal_ tvlalkajgiri Districi.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Articie 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the c'rcumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High cou* may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3.d respondent i.e., The Sub Registrar, Quthbullapur, Medchar - Markajgiri District, in refusing to register and rerease the Pending Document No. p.10/2021, vide rntimation of Refusar No. 0212021, dated OO|O1l2O21 , on the ground that the petitioner,s property i.e., plot No.12, admeasuring 100 sq. yards, in Sy. No.329/2, of chennakeshava Nagar, situated at Gajularamaram Village, Under GHMC Circle, Mandat and Regn. Sub_Dist. Quthbu'apur, Dist. and Regn. Dist. Medchar- Ivtarkajgiri, is in prohibitory rist under section 22-A of Registration Act as per the 1- Ranga Reddy District Gazette Notification R R.No.83. communicated by Joint corector, Ranga Reddy vide Fire

¶18

No.E5/4730/ 2O13lQuthbullapur/^{Nizampet, daled 251o9t2o13, 2. Deputycollector} andTahasildarQuthbullapurMandal.FileNo.BlSE3t2ol2,daledlTlo2l2ol2and 3. Gazette^{Notification No.134,dated 10iO3/2005and G O'tv'ts No 292' Revenue} (Registrationl),gthMarch2005communicatedbyCommissionerandlnspector General(RandS),HyderabadvideFileNo.Gl/4661/2005'ol.o2lo7l2005,is illegal, arbitrary,^{in violation of Articles14, 21 and 300-Aof Constitution of lndia} and also in^{violation of RegistrationAct, 1908, besides in violation of principlesof} natural^{justice and consequentlydirect the respondents herein to register and} release the^{Pending Document No. P.10/2021, dated 06/01/2021 by setting aside} the order of^{the Refusal No.02 of 2021 daledOOlOll2O21'}

¶19

IA NO:1OF^2O21

¶20

Petition under^{Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition, the HighCourt may be pleased to direct} the respondent^{no.3 herein to register and release the Pending DocumentNo'} P.1Ol2O21 , daled^{OGt01t2021try suspending the refusal} order passed^bY respondent no.3^{vide lntimation of Refusal No' O2l2O21'} dated 06/01/2021, pending disposal of the^{above writ petition'}

¶21

Counsel for the^{Petitioner: SRI KATIKARAVINDER REDDY}

¶22

Counsel for the^{Respondents: AGP FOR STAMPS AND REGISTRATION} The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶23

THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶24

W.P. N0.2536 of2021

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This writ petition has been fited chailenging the action of the Registering Authorities in refusing to register the subject documents based on the Gazette Notiflrcation R.R. No.83, dated 25.O9.2O13.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order dated 22.o3.2024 passed in W.P. Nos.9645 of 2O2t and W.p. No.26353 of 2023 by this Court. The learned counsel would further submit that this Court, while granting interim order dated 2a.O4.2O2I in W.P. No.9645 of 2O2t lnad, stipulated a condition not to resort to further conveyance of the subject property without leave of this Court and similarly in W.P. No.26353 of 2023 this Court, while granting interim order dated 22.O9.2023, had prohibited the parties from proceeding with further conveyance of the property except on obtaining required permission from tl'ris Court.

¶28

It is further submitted that in the present writ petition this Court, while granting interim order dated Oa.O2.2O2l, had directed the Registering authorities to register the subject documents. Subsequently, in pursuance of said interim order, the Registering authorities have registered the subject doctrments and as on today, on behalf of the respondents/ Registering authority no counter has been filed.

¶29

¶30

¶31

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Govr:rnment Pleader appearing for the Stamps and Registration did not dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material made available on record.

¶33

At this juncture, it is signihcant to note that the Division Bench of this Court vide its common order dated 19.1O.2023 passed in \V.P. No.283O0 of 2OO7 ar,d batch had dealt with the validity of Section 22-A of the Act as incorporatecl in the Registration Act, 1908 and the Amenderl Act, 19 of 2OO7 with effect from 20.06.2007 and had upheld the validity of the Secdon 22-A of the Act.

¶34

Having gone through the material made available on the record and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, it is essentizLl and necessary to excerpt the relevant para Nos.23 to 32 of the common order dated 22.03.2024 passed in W.P. Nos.96.45 of 2O2l arrd 26353 of 2023 by this Court, which reads as under:

¶35

'23. From a perusal of the Notification in R.R. No.83, dated^'25.09.2013, the subject lands were notihed under Section 22-A (11(a) for the purpose of Section 22-A(1). It is only a notice given inviting objections and suggestions on the above proposal from all persons who are likely to be affected thereby for being taken into consideration by the Government. The details of the properties mentioned in the annexure states that the subject [ands are Government lands.

¶36

Section 22-A (1) (e) of the Act manifests that any documents or class of documents pt:rtaining to the properties, the State Governmcnt may, by notifrcation prohibit the registration in rvhich avowed or accru(:d interests of Ceyf{d and State Governments, tocat Bodies, Educational, Cultural,

¶37

¶38

¶39

Retigious arld Charitable Institutions,^{those attachedby Civil, Criminal,} Revenue Courts and Direct and^{Indirect TaxLawsand others which are} likely to adversely^{alfect these interest.}

¶40

Section 22-A⁽²⁾ reads as under:

¶41

"(21 For the purpose of^{Ctause (e) of sub-section (1), the State} Government shall^publish a notification^{after obtaining reasonsforand} full description of properties^{furnishedby the DistrictCollectors} concerned in the manner as^{maybe prescribed."}

¶42

It is pertinent to note that in^{the case of VinJamurl RaJagopala} Chary^(Supra) paras^{156 had summarized andissueddirections'As per} the Clause (v) no notification is contemplated^{under sub-section(2) of} Section 22-A with respect^{to the properties falling under clauses(a) to(d)} of sub-section⁽¹⁾ of Section^{22-A-As per Ctause(vi), the} Properties covered under clause^(e) of Section^{22-A shall be notified in the official} Gaz€tte of the State Governments and^{shall be forwarded, along with the} list of properties, and a copy of^{the relevant notihcation/Gazette,to the} concerned registering authorities under^{the provisions of Registration Act} and shall also^place the said notification/^{Gazette on the websitesof both} the State Governments.

¶43

The subject lands in^{thesewrit petitions as per the Notihcation in} R.R.No.83 in File No.E5/4730 l2Ol3l Quthbullapur/ Quthbullapur,^dated ,S.OS.ZOf S, which according to the^{District Collector were classifiedas} Government lands and a Notifrcation^{was issuedcalling for} objections/ suggestions^{beforeptacingfor prohibitions. Section 22-A(1) (e)} and (2) stipulates that if any land is^{ctassified and determinedas} Government land, the Government^{shall publishan officialGazette} notification after obtaining^{reasonsfor and full descriptionof properties} furnished by the District Collector^{concernedin the manneras} Prescribed' In the case on hand, the respondents^{have not followedthe provisionsof} Section 22-A(1)(e)(2) and the^{guidelines issuedby the Full Benchin the} case of VlnJamurt RaJagopala Chary^{(Supra)'\ /herein at} Para^156held that the authorities are obliged to^{follow Clause (vi) for thoseproperties} covered under Clause^(e) of^{Section22-Aof thre Act, whereby suchlands} have to be notified in the ofhcial^{Gazette of the State. The Notificationin} R.R. No.83 dated 25.09.20¹³ communicated^{by the JointCollector, Ranga} Reddy vide File No-E5/4730/^{20 l3/Quthbullapur/} Quthbullapur,^dated [email protected]; Deputy^{Collector andTahasildhar,} Quthbutlapur^Mandal,Fite

¶44

¶45

I -.--

¶46

No.B/583/2O12, dated t2.O2.2O12 and the cazette Notification No.134, dated 10.03.2OO5 and G.O.Ms.No.292, Revenue (Registration I),96 March 2O05 communicated by the Commissioner and Inspector General (Revenue & Stamps), Hyderabad vide File No.Gt 1466t / 2005, dated Q2.O7.2OOS are not in accordance with the provisions of the Section 22_A (1) (e) and 22 ll(2l and also as per Clause (vi) of the guidelines issued in the case of VlnJamurl R4Jagopala Chary (Supra) and the sarne cannot be the basis for denying for registration of the subject properties.

¶47

Further, the Tahsildar vide File No.B/S83/2012, dared 17.O2.2O12 had notified rhe particular property as the Govemment land and requested the Sub-Registrar not to register any deed of convcyarce. The District Collector on 25.09.2013 had issued preliminary notiltcation calling for objections a',d the said notirrcation was found to be defective bv this oourt in w.p. No.19069 of 20t4 dated 25.08.2014.

¶48

It is also pertinent to note that in the counter hled in w.p. No.263S3 of 2023 prohibiting transfer/ registration that subsequcnt to the Notilication in R.R. No.83 dated 25.09.2013 the answering r.espondents have not taken any steps in notifying in the official Gazette of State Government in terms of the guideline No.(vi) issued by the Full Bench in the case of Vlnjamuri R4iagopala Chary (Supra).

¶49

As such, the Noti{ication in R.R.No.E3 in File No.ES/473O120t3/ Quthbullapur/Quthbullapur, dated 25.09.2O13, is only a notrce given for inviting objections and suggestions and this cannot be thr: basis for refusal for registration of the subject properties. [n vjew of the sarne, Gazette Notification in R.R. No.83, dated 2S.Og.2Ol3, commrrnicated by the .loint Collector, Ranga Reddy vide Fite No.E5/4 73 O /2Ot 3l Quthbullapur/ Gajulararnaram, dated 25.09.2013, 2l Deputy (lolector & Tahsildar Quthbuuapur Mandal, File No.B/583/2012, dated tZ.O2.2O 72 and the cazette Notifrcation No.l34, dated 10.O3.2O0S afld G.O.Ms.No.292, dated 09.03.2005 are not in consonance to the provisions of Section 22-A ot the ReBistration Act, t90g and 22_A(1)(e) and Clause (wi) o[ the guidelines and the same cannot be referred for the 1;urpose of denying registrarion of the subject properties. Consequently. reference made vide in File No.E5/423O /2Ol3/euthbullapur/Gajutaramaram, and File No.E5 /473Ol 2O 13/ euthbultapur/euthbuuapur, dated 2S.Og.2OL3 and File No.B/583/2Ot2 dated t7.O2.2Ot2 of the Tahsildar, eurhbullapur

¶50

(

¶51

l.^!::, t:^.:li: ;! o

¶52

u']t;ir. "

¶53

¶54

Mandal, are declared as illegal, arbitrary and bad in law and are hereby €et aside.

¶55

Accordingly, W.P. Nos-964S of2021 and 26353 of 2023 are allowed

¶56

This Court ot [email protected], while directing the Registering authority to receive and process the document without refereace to ttre letter dated L7.O2.2O12, and the Notifrcation in R.R. No.83 dated 25_O9-2013, had directed the petitioner not to resort to further conveyance of the subject propcrty without leave of this Court. [n this regard, it is made clear that since these writ petitions [W.P. Nos.964S of2O2l and 26353 of 20.231 are allowed, the condition that was imposed to the effect tllat not to resort to further conveyance of the subject property is hereby reca[ed. The Registering Authorities a_r-e directed to make necessary changes in the records.

¶57

¶58

[t is made clear that mere registration of the document does not confer title on the subject property and it is atso made clea_r that this order would not have any bearing on all those matters where title/rights of the parties are pending before the authorities either in revisioo/appeals for adjudication and in any other case this order also does not preclude the parties in asserting their rights before a competent Court of law. There shalt be no order as to costs."

¶59

Since the issues involved in this writ petition are similar to those that

¶60

have been considered by this court in the common order dated 22.03.2Cl24 passed in W.P. Nos.9645 of.2O2l and 26353 ot 2023 and for rhe reasons alike, this writ petition is a_llowed in terms of the common order dated

¶61

l ,,. .: ] ,1 22.03.2024 passed in W.P. Nos.964S of 2O2t and 26353 of 2C23 by rhis Co[it;, There shall be no order as to costs.

¶62

i.).. :

¶63

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shalt stand closed. at Fule Nisi has been^{made absolutE as above.}

¶64

Witness the Hon'ble^{the Chief Justice SRI ALOK ARADHE' on this Tuesday'} The Thirteenth^{Day Of AugustTwo Thousand And Twenty Four}

¶65

¶66

¶67

SD/.V.KAVITHA ASSISTA\T^REGISTRAR Y'

¶68

//TRUE COPY/I

¶69

SECTION OFFICER

¶70

Tl-'c Princ,pal Secretary {Re,renue1. Secretar,at. fhe State of Telangana dv(2-r15a4

¶71

The District Registrar, Medchal- Malkajgiri District. 3. The Sub Registrar, Quthbullapur, Medchal - Malkalgiri District.

¶72

The Colhctor, lt4edchal - Markajgiri District.

¶73

The Tahasildar, Quthbullapur Mandal, Medchal- Malkajgiri District. 6. One CC to Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Stamps and Registration, High Court ior the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUTI 8. Two CD Copies TJ8SK#

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 310812024

ORDER

WP.No.2536 of²⁰²¹

1 5 EtT ztt'i
t"t t,
)tl SpAtetl<s

¶79

ALLOWING THE WRIT^PETITION