Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. It is the contention of the Petitioners that respective Petitioners executed agreement of sale with certain individuals regarding respective lands and thereafter executed conveyance deeds. Petitioners have given details of transaction in the petition.

3. It is the contention of the Petitioners that the respective Sub-

Seema WP 13426 of 2017.doc Registrars refused to register conveyance deeds on the ground that in 7/12 extracts there is an entry that the lands are Devasthan lands and therefore for the said transaction, sanction of Charity Commissioner is required. The Petitioners relied on circulars dated 30.04.2005, 27.07.2009 and 05.12.2013 issued by the Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Stamps of Maharashtra State. The Petitioners also relied on Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "said Act".) and Rule 44 of the Maharashtra Registration Rules 1961.

4. Affidavit in reply of Ms. Mangala M. Pawar, Joint Sub-Registar (In charge) Vasai-I, District Palghar, dated 08th February 2019 was filed on behalf of Respondent No. 6. In the said affidavit-in-reply, it is the contention of the Respondent No. 6 that documents i.e. conveyance deeds were not produced by Petitioners for registration in the office of Respondent No. 6. It is contended that photocopies of said conveyance deeds are also not produced alongwith the petition. Thus there is no cause of action for filing writ petition. As far as the aspect of bar of transfer of Devasthan land is concerned, it is stated that for such transaction prior permission of the Charity Commissioner is required. It is contended that it is necessary to execute the conveyance deeds and present it for registration as per section 32 read with section 23 and 32(a) of the said Act and after presentation of conveyance deeds further action can be taken.

7.3 Mr. Vedchetan Patil relied on judgment of Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nashik Region, Nashik passed in change Report Nos. 223 of 1972 and 428 of 1972 and contended that the lands in question are not Devasthan land.

8. On the other hand Mr. S. L. Babar, the learned AGP appearing Seema WP 13426 of 2017.doc for the Respondents raised following contentions:-

8.1 As per Section 72 of the said Act an alternate remedy of appeal to Registrar is available to the Petitioner assuming that the documents namely conveyance deeds were presented for registration and registration is refused. 8.2 There is nothing to indicate that the said documents namely respective conveyance deeds were submitted in the office of Respondent No. 6 for registration. He submitted that reply on 27.07.2017 was given as notice dated 10.07.2017 was issued on behalf of the Petitioners. However even notice dated 10.07.2017 also do not indicate that conveyance deeds were executed and presented for registration. 8.3 Entry in 7/12 extracts of the subject land shows that the lands are Devasthan lands and therefore unless permission under section 36 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act is obtained the conveyance deeds can not be registered. He relied on the clause in the registered agreement for sale to the effect that as the lands are Devasthan lands, permission of the appropriate authorities would be taken. Therefore, he submitted that no fault can be found with the impugned letter/action. 8.4 He relied on recent 7/12 extract indicating that the lands in question are Devasthan lands to contend that the transaction requires sanction of Charity Commissioner under section 36 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act.

Seema WP 13426 of 2017.doc 10.6 The above factual position clearly shows that there is specific recital in the respective agreements for sale that the said land is Devasthan land i.e. of public trust and therefore, necessary permissions would be obtained. If a land belongs to public trust the previous permission of Charity Commissioner is required to be obtained under section 36 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act. However as it is the contention of Petitioners that the said aspect can not be looked into by the registering authorities as the same is relating to title and therefore we are not going into this aspect. However we keep all the contentions in that behalf open.