Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M/S.Rasamadhuri Food Products, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 21 November, 2022
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.3453 of 2015
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
"to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in treating the land of the Petitioner to the extent of Ac.2.65 cents (out of Ac.5.15 cents) in Sy.No.2204 and Ac.4.20 cents (full) in Sy.No.2205 of Settigunta Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Kadapa District vide Endorsement L.Dis.LRDT/48/2015, dated 12.2.2015 as a Government land on the ground that the RSR reflects dots as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300 of the Constitution and set aside the same and pass such other orders".
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of an extent of Ac.2.65 cents out of Ac.5.15 cents in Sy.No.2204 and Ac.4.20 cents in Sy.No.2205 of Settigunta Village, Railway Kodur Mandal, Kadapa District, having purchased the same from one Sri Addepalli Subrahmanyam Raju vide registered sale deed dated 18.12.2004. His vendor Addepalli Subrahmanyam Raju purchased the same vide Document No.507/2001, dated 27.06.2001.
2
3. The case of the petitioner is that the respondents have issued pattadar passbook in the name of his vendor basing on the registered sale deed dated 27.06.2001, treating the said land as a patta land. When the petitioner intended to lease out the said property in favour of third parties, he approached the 5th respondent herein, who informed the petitioner vide letter dated 24.12.2014, that the subject land is a DKT land as per the information provided by the Revenue Department and therefore, he cannot entertain further registration of the document in relation to the subject property. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the 4th respondent by way of representation dated 26.12.2014 and the 4th respondent after duly considering the said representation, has submitted a report to the 3rd respondent and thereafter, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned endorsement vide L.Dis.LRDT/48/2015, dated 12.02.2015 stating that the land is not an assigned land, but the same is a Government land in the light of the RSR reflecting „dots‟. Challenging the said endorsement, the present writ petition is filed on the ground that if at all the RSR reflects „dots‟, the case has to be treated to be falling within the scope of Section 22-A (1) (e) of the Registration Act, wherein a notification would be mandatory for prohibition of registration. But since 3 there is no such notification in the present case, the 5th respondent cannot refuse to entertain the document for registration.
4. When the writ petition came up for admission on 18.02.2015, this Court was pleased to grant the interim order as follows:
"......there shall be an interim direction to the 5th respondent to receive the lease deed presented by the petitioner for registration and register the same. It is made clear that the registered document shall not be used for any purpose and charge, mortgage, third party rights or any other encumbrances whatsoever, shall not be created over the said land. Further, the Sub-Registrar, Chitvel, Kadapa District, shall make an endorsement on the document mentioning about the pendency of the writ petition; and such endorsement shall be subject to the result in the writ petition."
5. The 4th respondent-Tahsildar filed the counter stating that the list of Government lands as well as assigned lands were already furnished to the Sub-Registrar, Chitvel, who refused for registration. Hence the petitioner approached the Tahsildar, Kodur, who has submitted a detailed report to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajampet reporting that the subject lands are shown dots (....) in RSR and treated as Government land. 4 Basing on the report of Tahsildar and after verification of Revenue records, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajampet has confirmed that it is a Government land and shown dots (....) in RSR and rejected for grant of No Objection Certificate and issued an endorsement vide L.Dis.LRDT/48/2015, dated 12.02.2015. Further stated that the Register of Holdings (R.H.) cannot be taken into consideration for registration.
6. On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the 5th respondent refused to register the document submitted by the petitioner on the ground that the subject land is a Government land and shown dots (....) in RSR. In such a case, the remedy open to the petitioner is to submit an application to the competent authority under Section 6 of the A.P. Dotted Lands Act, while making online application in Form- VI.
7. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to make appropriate application to the competent authority under Section 6 of the A.P. Dotted Lands Act, and on making such application, the respondents are bound to dispose of the same, within eight (08) weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5
8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of, without touching the merits of the case. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
_______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date : 21.11.2022 ARR 6 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.3453 of 2015 Date : 21-11-2022 ARR