IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.15769 OF 2010 Between: Khanna Ashok Kumar. … Petitioner AND The District Registrar, Registration and Stamps Department, Guntur. … Respondent This Court made the following: O R D E R : The petitioner assails the action of the Registration Authorities in insisting upon a No Objection Certificate from the Urban Land Ceiling Authorities for processing the registration of documents in respect of his land admeasuring Ac.4.00 cents in Patta No.1053 in Survey No.73/2 of R.Agraharam of Guntur City, Guntur District. 2. It is the petitioner’s case that the staff of the District Registrar, Registration and Stamps Department, Guntur, the sole respondent, informed him that he would have to produce a No Objection Certificate from the Urban Land Ceiling Authorities for receiving his documents in respect of the subject land. The petitioner placed reliance on the proceedings dated 15-06-2000 passed by the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Guntur, under Section 10(2) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for brevity ‘the Act of 1976), holding that the subject land did not attract the provisions of the said Act and that the declarant was entitled to be treated as a non-surplus holder under the Act, and contended that in the light of the said proceedings, the Registration Authorities could not insist upon production of a No Objection Certificate from the Urban Land Ceiling Authorities. 3. The District Registrar, Registration and Stamps Department, Guntur, filed a counter stating that he was not a proper and necessary party to the petition and that the Joint Sub-Registrar concerned before whom the document was to be presented by the petitioner, ought to have been impleaded. He however conceded that he was the supervisory authority over all the Sub Registrars functioning in the District. 4. As the competent authority under the Act of 1976 has already held that the subject land did not attract the provisions thereof, it is clear that insistence upon a No Objection Certificate from the authorities under the Act of 1976 is unnecessary. Though the Sub-Registrar concerned, who would have to entertain the petitioner’s documents for registration in respect of the subject land, is not a party to the present writ petition, the Administrative Head of the District is before this Court. The Writ Petition is therefore disposed of directing the Registration Authorities not to insist upon a No Objection Certificate from the Urban Land Ceiling Authorities as a condition precedent for entertaining documents for registration presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject land. Such documents, if presented, shall be received and processed in accordance with the due procedure for registration without insisting upon such a No Objection Certificate. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 24-03-2011. KVS/BSB