Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
State Of Andhra Pradesh, vs Y. Pullaiah on 21 June, 2019
Author: C. Praveen Kumar
Bench: C.Praveen Kumar, Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
WRIT APPEAL No.137 of 2019
JUDGMENT:(per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice C. Praveen Kumar}
1. The present appeal came to be filed challenging the order dated 18.3.2019 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in W.P.No.3566 of 2019, whereunder the 2nd appellant-Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Stamps and Registration, Kurnool, Kurnool District, was directed to receive and register the document presented by the writ petitioner in respect of the land admeasuring 320.88 sq. yards in Sy.No.142 of Johrapuram, 69th ward of Kurnool Municipal Corporation as per the provisions of the Stamps and Registration Act and Rules made thereunder.
2. Heard both sides and perused the record.
3. The learned Government Pleader would contend that the main writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Stamps & Registration, Kurnool to receive and register the document presented by the writ petitioner and that passing of the order in the above I.A. without giving any opportunity to the appellants to file counter is illegal and incorrect.
4. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the writ petitioner would contend that the order impugned does not cause any prejudice to the appellants and that the appellants cannot be aggrieved by the order impugned.
5. Sri Aarifulla Khan, learned Standing Counsel for Wakf Board submits that the subject property is the wakf property. 2
6. Perusal of the material available on record shows that initially, a direction was given to the 2nd appellant-Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Stamps and Registration, Kurnool, to receive and register the document presented by the writ petitioner as per the provisions of law. But, in subsequent lines of the order impugned, it was observed as follows:
"In case, the list is sent as stated by the Standing Counsel, by the Secretary of Wakf Board stating that the subject property belongs to Wakf Board, the same shall be taken into consideration while considering the documents presented by the petitioner."
7. Reading of the above lines would clearly indicate that it was left open to the 2nd appellant-Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Stamps and Registration, Kurnool, to receive and register the document after taking into consideration the list submitted by the Secretary, Wakf Board. The direction given by the learned single Judge cannot be said to be a positive one. In case, as per the representation made by the learned standing Counsel, the subject property is found to be wakf property in the list sent by the Secretary of Wakf Board, it is always open to the 2nd appellant-Joint Sub-Registrar-I, Stamps and Registration, Kurnool, to refrain himself from registering the document presented by the petitioner and bring the same to the notice of the learned single Judge, at the time of hearing of the main writ petition or in any consequential proceedings.
8. With the above observations, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, ACJ ____________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J Dated: 21.06.2019 Nn 3 THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT APPEAL No.137 of 2019 (Judgment delivered by the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice C. Praveen Kumar} Dated: 21.6.2019 Nn