Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
This Writ Petition Has Been Filed By The vs General Power Of Attorney ... on 11 November, 2022
RC,J
W.P.No.2099 of 2019
1
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION No. 2099 of 2019
ORDER:
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, represented by his General Power of Attorney Holder-cum-father, invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
"...to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in insisting the petitioners to produce 'No Objection Certificate' from the respondents 3 to 5 and consequently refusing to furnish the basic value from the basic value register for executing the deed of conveyance for registration of the RCC slab building bearing Door No.3-109 and site admeasuring 481 square yards in R.S.No.218/6 situated in Vatluru revenue village in Pedapadu Mandal of West Godavari District in favour of third persons, as illegal, irregular, irrational, violative of provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and G.O.Ms.No.279, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 04.07.2016 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to furnish valuation for such property, receive and register any deed of conveyance connected to the aforesaid property........."
2.The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he is the absolute owner, possessor and enjoyer of RCC slab building bearing Door No.3-109 admeasuring 481 square yards in R.S.No.218/6 situated in Vatluru Revenue Village in Pedapadu Mandal of West Godavari District having RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 2 purchased the same from its rightful owner Lingamgunta Malleswari under registered sale deed dated 30.03.2009 vide document No.664 of 2009 . It is further case of the petitioner that his vendor in turn purchased the said property under sale deed dated 06.02.1995 vide document No.623 of 1995 and she had been in uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the property. It is further submitted that the petitioner is working as Software Engineer in California and he executed General Power of Attorney in favour of his father to manage his properties and also to execute any deed of conveyance with regard to his properties including the subject property and the GPA holder of the petitioner entered into contract of sale with third party in respect of the subject land and in order to perform his part of the contract, he approached the 2 nd respondent-Sub Registrar, Vatluru and requested him to furnish particulars of valuation, but he refused to furnish the same stating that the subject property is a assigned land and insisted him to obtain 'No Objection Certificate'.
It is the further case of the petitioner that Ac.1-70 cents in Survey No.218/6 of Vatluru Mandal was assigned to a freedom fighter in the year 1980 by the then Tahsildar under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 3 Revenue Board Standing Orders. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.279 dated 04.07.2016 dispensing with the procedure of obtaining NOC in respect of the lands assigned to Ex-servicemen, Freedom Fighters and political sufferers wherein a period of 10 years has lapsed from the date of assignment and in view of the said G.O., the 2nd respondent has no power or authority to insist the petitioner to obtain NOC and the 2nd respondent is under legal obligation to furnish valuation particulars of the subject property, receive documents and register the same as contemplated under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and Rules made thereunder as per the ratio laid down by Division Bench of this Court.
It is the further case of the petitioner that his property does not fall within the ambit of Section 22-A of the Registration Act and the 2nd respondent cannot refuse to furnish the basic value certificate to the subject property and the 2nd respondent does not have power, authority or jurisdiction to prevent registration of any document connected to the subject property and due to inaction on the part of the 2 nd respondent, the petitioner could not deal with the subject property, hence, the present writ petition has been filed.
RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 4
3. The respondent authorities did not choose to file any counter affidavit.
4. Heard Ms. Rachana, learned counsel, representing Smt. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.
5. Ms. P.Rachana, learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration, contended that originally the land was assigned to a freedom fighter and the assignee is entitled to alienate the same after lapse of statutory period of 10 years from the date of assignment and accordingly the original assignee has alienated the property after completion of statutory period. It is further submitted that from the vendee of the original assignee the petitioner has purchased the property and thus there is no need for obtaining No Objection Certificate as per terms of G.O.Ms.No.279, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 04.07.2016, wherein the Government has dispensed with the procedure of issuing No Objection Certificate after completion of statutory period and thus the action of the 2 nd respondent in insisting the petitioner for No Objection Certificate is unsustainable and prayed to allow the writ petition.
RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 5
6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on written instructions placed on record, contended that the land in Survey No.218/4 in an extent of Ac.8-40 cents, which was classified as Tank Poramboke in revenue records, was sub divided into 218/4 to 218/9 under proceedings dated 01.04.1980 and the classification of the land was converted from Tank Poramboke to A.W.D.lands and the subject land in an extent of Ac.1-78 cents in R.S.No.218/6 was assigned to Yalamanchili Kanaka Bapaiah and the said written instructions further states that the said Kanaka Bapaiah sold the property to Lingamgunta Malleswari under registered sale deed bearing No.623/1995 and the petitioner herein purchased an extent of 481 Sq.yards covered in R.S.No.218-6 from Lingamgunta Malleswari vide registered sale deed dated 664/2009 dated 30.03.2009. Since the initial assignment of land was under D-patta, the subject property was included in prohibited properties list under section 22-A of the Registration Act and after verification of the D-patta conditions, necessary action will be taken. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
7. The instructions placed on record shows that since the subject land was assigned under a D-patta, the same was included in prohibited RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 6 properties under Section 22-A of the Registration Act and until the original D-patta is verified the subject property cannot be deleted from the list. The written instructions nowhere states that the petitioner sought deletion of the subject property from the prohibited properties list on the ground that it was originally assigned to a Freedom Fighter. This makes it clear that the Tahsildar is not aware of the purpose for which the petitioner has sought for deletion of the subject property and further the original assignment record is yet to be verified to know the nature of assignment made to the original assignee.
8. In view of the above, instead of keeping this writ petition pending, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:
(a) The petitioner is at liberty to make a detailed representation to the 3rd respondent-District Collector enclosing all documents in support of his claim requesting to delete the subject property from prohibited properties list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order;
RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 7
(b) On receipt of such representation, the 3 rd respondent -District Collector is directed to enquire into the matter, give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner of being heard and pass a reasoned order within a period of three months thereafter and communicate the same to the petitioner
(c) There shall be no order as to costs.
As sequel thereto, miscellaneous petition, if any, pending shall stand closed. Interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated.
_________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 11th November, 2022 RR RC,J W.P.No.2099 of 2019 8 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION No.2099 of 2019 11th November, 2022 RR