Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Tayyib Muslim Welfare Society, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 29 September, 2022
Author: D Ramesh
Bench: D Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARA (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY RINTH DAY GF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TW 2PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESN WRIT PETITION No. 22087 of 2022 Between: Tayyib Muslim Welfare Soctety,, Rep. by Hs President, Sha Shaik Sulaiman Baba, aged about 59 years, Resd.No. R23 Ramarajupall, Kadapa City and District ik Subhan Basha, S/S: 1989, Tayyid Nagar, oe POEIONGL AND }. The State of Andhra Pradesh,, Rep. by fs Principal Secretary, Revenue (tamins and Registration) Department, A.P. Secretariat a t Velagapudl, Amaravath, Guntur District 2. The District Registrar, YOR Kadapa District at Kadapa 3. The Sub-Re ho strar, Kadapa fRurall, YSR Kadapa District 4, Shaik Khadar Basha, S/o. Ghause Peer, Aged about 67 years, R/o. D.NO.7/ 705, Moc hampet Kacana City S, Sud. Azam, S/o. MLA, Rahim, Aged about 47% years, Ro. DANG. 13/99, Rahamthulla Street, Kadana Petitions urder Arti cle 226 of the Constitution of india grayl ine that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cour may be rdeased to issue an appr apriate Writ, order or direotion mostly one winch | BS nature of a Writ of Mandarnus s declaring that any actien of the 3rd Responde wi Rte oe spe % : tor anfertaining the document presented by the 4th Respondent purportedly o of Tayyib Muslim Welfare Soclety with respect tO oroperties of the 5 'ety 'in i ANo. 74/2020 in O.8.Na. 1490/2026 on the file of the Court of the Principal Jt wna Civil Judge, Kadapa for registration as contrary te the Standing Orders issued under nee Registration Act, 1908, arbitra Hlegal, irregular, violative of Articles 14 nei 300-4 of Indian Constitution, unjustified and unsustainable and consequently direct the Res sponden ts mot to onterta in any registration in respect of the mroperties in Sy. No. 20! { admeasuring Ac.8.90 cents, yMegi/) admeasuring &c.3.48 cents, Sy.No.21/3 sdmeasun ring AC. APL cent , 8y. Na.inet yet allotted) admeasuring Ac I, 2 ° as and other tant of lands e in jeasuring Ac.5.78 cents in Pymashi No. i18/6, 12 TIAL T3, . 183 total ng an extent of Ac. 30.00 cents abbanurs am Villas ek mane handal YOR Kacdapa District. LANO, tof 2022 3- Petition un ~ ction 782 CPC praying that in the irCUNis stances stated in the affidavit f filed din supoort of WLS, the High Court may he oleased to fortiewith direct the Respondents rat to register the prox erties in Sy No. 20 - admeasuring Ac. 8.90 cents, Sy.Ne.g1/1 sdimeasuring Ac.3.48 cents, Sy.No.gt/3 andmeasuring Ac.4.72 cents, $y No. {nat yet Loni Urin PTE cer nd other extent of lands aeimeasy wing Ac.§ ae . S43, 21S 1, 195 totaling an extent of Ac. 30.0 : san fal, ¥SR Kadapa DNs ietrict, sending fle of the High Court. ee meine, vets ef conte BSD % wi % - 2? - The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Smt Sodum Anvesha, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Gov. Pleader for Revenue for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, the Court made the following ORDER :
-
"Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on respondent Nos.4 and 5 by RPAD and file proof of service.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there are disputes between the parties. In fact, the petitioners have approached the competent Civil Court and obtained interim injunction to maintain Status-quo in [.A. No.74 of 2020 in OS. No.149 of 2020. While the said suit is pending and orders passed by the competent Civil Court are subsisting, the respondents are trying to alienate property. In fact, to substantiate the contentions of the petitioner, he relied upon the documents submitted by the respondent way back on 11.1.2022. At the behest of the petitioners, the same documents were refused again and now they are trying to alienate property, hence, the present writ petition.
Considering the submissions made and on a perusal of the orders passed by the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa in 0.5.No.149 of 2020, there shall be a direction to the respondents not to alienate the Property to any 3™ party.
Post this case after three (3) weeks."
$d/- G. HELA NAIDU, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To
1.The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Stamps and Registration) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat at Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District
2.The District Registrar, YSR Kadapa District at Kadapa
3.The Sub-Registrar, Kadapa (Rural), YSR Kadapa District 4,Shaik Khadar Basha, S/o. Ghouse Peer, Aged about 61 years, R/o. D.No.7/705, Mochampet, Kadapa City 3.5.Md. Azam, S/o. M.A. Rahim, R/o. D.No.13/99, Rahamthulla Street, Kadapa. (Addressee Nos. 1 to 5 by RPAD)
6. The Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa. 7,Two CCs to the G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P., at Amaravati(Out)
8.One CC to Smt Sodum Anvesha, Advocate(OPUC)
9.One spare copy.
Note :- "LA.No. 1614 of 2020" mentioned in the order portion is corrected as "I.A.No. 74 of 2020" as per the order of this Court dated 23-11-2022 in LA.No. 2 of 2022. Substitute this amended order in place of earlier order, which was dispatched on 07-10-2022.
Sd/- G. HELA NAIDU, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR HIGH COURT DR, BT. 29-08-2022, AMENDED ORDER (23-41-2022) W.PLNo. 22089 of 2032 DIRECTION