Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Geethala Pratap Reddy vs State Of Ap on 25 January, 2021
Author: M. Ganga Rao
Bench: M. Ganga Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.1667 OF 2021
ORDER:-
This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the 4th respondent in treating the land situated in Sy.No.252 of Gundluru Revenue Village, Rajampet Mandal, YSR Kadapa District as DKT lands, contrary to the Sale Certificate issued in EP.No.19/2011-12 under Sub-Rule 14(iii) of Rule 53 of A.P Cooperative Societies Rules 1964 as illegal and arbitrary apart from violative of petitioner's constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the 4th respondent to receive the documents in respect of an extent of Ac.0.49 cents or 075 Square links in Plot Nos.2,3,4,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,35-A & 35-B belonging to the 1st petitioner and an extent of Ac.2.46 cents belonging to the 2nd petitioner as per the decision of this Court in Sub Registrar, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District Vs. K. Guravaiah1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Registration and Stamps appearing for the respondents.
The case of the petitioners is that the 1st petitioner purchased land admeasuring Ac.3.49 cents situated in Sy.No.252 through public auction held by the Supervisor/Sales Officer, Kadapa District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Kadapa and a sale certificate dated 29.06.2012 was issued in his favour. Thereafter the 1st petitioner sold the above lands in favour of the 2nd petitioner vide document bearing No.3479 of 2012 dated 08.08.2012. The 2nd petitioner leveled the lands and laid plots, in 1 2009(2) ALD 250 (DB) 2 MGR,J WP_1667_2021 which the 1st petitioner purchased plot Nos.2,3,4,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,35-A & 35-B vide document No.2855/2014 dated 09.10.2014. The 2nd petitioner sold Plot Nos. 1, 19, 19- A, 24, 30, 34A, 38, 44, 45, 50, 55, 58 & 68 in favour of one Jada Srinivasulu vide document bearing No.2875/2014 dated 10.10.2014. The 2nd respondent is having remaining land, an extent of Ac.2.46 cents in his name.
The grievance of the petitioners is that they intended to sell the remaining plots situated in Sy.No.252, Gundluru Revenue Village, Rajampet Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, to meet the financial necessities of their families and approached the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent refused to issue valuation certificate stating that the lands situated in Sy.No.252 were included in the prohibited property list. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier when the 1st petitioner intended to sell the land, an extent of Ac.3.49 cents purchased by him in a public auction, and approached the Sub-Registrar for presentation of the documents for registration, the Sub-Registrar refused to receive the same on the ground that originally the said lands were assigned. Therefore, the 1st petitioner filed W.P.No.22440 of 2012 before this Court and this Court, by orders dated 24.12.2012, allowed the writ petition and directed the registering authority to receive the documents for sale, process the same for registration without reference to the ground that the lands were originally assigned. Subsequently the 1st petitioner sold the land to the 2nd petitioner, who leveled the 3 MGR,J WP_1667_2021 lands and laid plots. Jada Srinivasulu, purchased Plot Nos.1,19,19-A, 24, 30, 34-A, 38, 44, 45, 50, 55, 58 & 68, from the 2nd petitioner and he intended to sell some of the above plots but as the Sub-Registrar refused to issue valuation certificate on the ground that the above said properties were included in the prohibited property list, Jada Srinivasulu filed WP.No.17554 of 2020 and this Court by orders dated 09.10.2020 allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents therein to delete the land of the petitioner from the prohibited property list and further directed the 4th respondent therein to receive and process the documents for registration without reference to the prohibited property list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. Now again when the petitioners intended to sell the remaining plots and approached the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent refused to issue valuation certificate stating that the lands in Sy.no.252 were included in the prohibited property list, contrary to the earlier orders of this Court in Sub-Registrar, Srikalahasti and another v. K. Guravaiah and another [2009(2) ALD 250(DB)], WP.Nos.22440 of 2012 and 17554 of 2020.
In K. Guravaiah's case referred supra, this Court held that when the original assignee mortgaged the land assigned to him in favour of the Bank or a financial institution or Co-operative Society under A.P. Co-Operative Societies Act, 1964 and if the money is not paid, the consequences provided in the Transfer of Property Act, 1982 would naturally follow; that it is permissible to put the said land to public auction under the said Act and recover the loan dues to the financial institution by way of sale; the land loses its 4 MGR,J WP_1667_2021 character of assignment and such a sale is valid in law. It is also held that as per Section 2(1) of the A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, mortgage in favour of a bank or a Co- operative Society does not amount to alienation. Following the said decision in K. Guravaiah's case, W.P.Nos.22440 of 2012 and W.P.No.17554 of 2020 were allowed.
In view of the aforesaid orders, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 4th respondent to receive the documents presented by the petitioners in respect of the land, an extent of Ac.0.49 cents or 075 Square links in Plot Nos.2, 3, 4, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 35-A & 35-B belonging to the 1st petitioner and an extent of Ac.2.46 cents belonging to the 2nd petitioner situated in Sy.No.252 of Gunduluru Revenue Village, Rajampet Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, process the same for registration, register if it is otherwise in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act and the Rules made thereunder and release the same to the petitioners as per law, without reference to the prohibited property list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of submission of the documents by the petitioners. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO 25.01.2021 Vjl