IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 20934 of 2008 Between: 1 Dr. Y. Chandrasekhara Chowdhary, S/o. Late Y.M.K. Chandra Chowdhary, R/o. U.S.A. Rep. by his power of Attorney Holder, R. Suresh, S/o. Late R.J. Chowdhary, Aged about 37 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 6-3-1218/6/2, Umanagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 2 Smt. R. Geetha, W/o. R. Vasudeva Prasad, R/o. 6-3-1218/6/2, Uma Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 3 R. Vasudeva Prasad, S/o. R.J. Chowdhary, R/o. 6-3-1218/6/2, Uma Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 4 Smt. R. Seema, W/o. R. Suresh, R/o. 6-3-1218/6/2, Uma Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 5 Dr. Y. Laxmi, S/o. Late Y. Chandrasekhara Chowdhary, R/o. U.S.A. Rep. by his power of Attorney Holder, R. Suresh, S/o. Late R.J. Chowdhary, Aged about 37 years, Occ: Business, R/o. 6-3-1218/6/2, Umanagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 6 R. Suresh, S/o. Late R.J. Chowdhary, R/o. 6-3-1218/6/2, Uma Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad. 7 Ch. Vasudeva Rao, S/o. Vednkateshwar Rao, R/o. Plot No. 123/A, Gokul Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 8 Kudipudi Venkataramana, S/o. Kudupudi Gollaiah, R/o. 8-3-293/C/2, Dwarakanagar Colony, Shaikpet, Hyderabad. 9 Alyan Srinivas, S/o. Alyan Kalidas, R/o. 2-61/B, PJR Nagar, Gachibowli, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. 10 V. Kota Reddy, S/o. V. Shiva Kota Reddy, R/o. Plot No. 150, Prashanth Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. 11 Smt. Susheela Bai, W/o. Arjun Singh, r/o. 14-10-584/85, Lower Dhoolpet, Hyderabad. 12 Sri. M. Mahesh, S/o. Late M. Munnalal, R/o. 13-1-1133/A, Upper Dhoopet, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Principal Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District, Moosapet, Hyderabad. 3 The Sub-Registrar, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. 4 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate Writ, order or directionmore especially one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing to receive and register the document in respect of the lands of the Petitioners in sy.No.s 336, 338, 340 and 342, situated at Puppalguda Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as bad, illegal, unconstitutional violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and without any authority and consequently set aside the G.O.Ms.No. 1092 Revenue (Registration-I), dated 6- 6-2005 in so far as the lands of the Petitioners in Sy.No. 336, 338, 340 and 342 situated at Puppalguda Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District is concerned and also direct the respondents to receive and register the document in respect of the above lands beolonging to the petitioners in accordance with law, in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH.SHANMUKHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 20934 of 2008 Oral order: The petitioners state that they along with one Atluri Shivarama Prasad and four others are joint owners and possessors of agricultural land in an extent of Acs. 16.37 guntas in Sy. No. 336, Acs. 16.29 gts in Sy. No. 338, and extent of Acs. 18.03 gts in Sy. No. 340 and an extent of Acs. 10.29 gts. in Sy. No. 342, having purchased the same under separated registered sale deeds. That the inter se disputes, were settled before the Lok Adalat at Ranga Reddy, vide the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2006 passed in O.S. No. 116 of 2002, and as per the terms and conditions of the said decree, they are in possession and enjoyment of the lands in question as absolute owners thereof. The petitioners state that they being the absolute owners of the land, intended to sell a part of the above properties to their prospective purchasers, and accordingly, when they presented the documents for registration, respondent No.3, refused to receive and register the documents on the ground that the government issued G.O. Ms. No. 1092, dated 6.6.2005, under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, prohibiting registration of the lands covered by Sy. Nos. 336, 338, 340 and 342. Hence, they ﬁled the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions to the respondents to register the documents presented by them in respect of the subject matter of property, which belongs to them. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that G.O. Ms. No. 1092 dated 6.6.2005 was issued by the Government under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908. The legality or otherwise of Section 22-A of the Act which was incorporated in the Registration Act by A.P. Amendment Act 4 of 1999, fell for consideration before this Court in W.P. No. 14099 of 2003 and batch, and this Court vide judgment dated 7.12.2005 following the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Basanth Nahata[1] had struck down the said amendment as unconstitutional. As such, the impugned notiﬁcation of the Government in G.O. Ms. No.1091 dated 6.6.2005 issued under Section 22-A of the Act is not valid and the same is liable to the quashed. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that after the striking down of Section 22-A of the Registration Act by the Division Bench of this Court, the Government has not issued any fresh notiﬁcation prohibiting registration of the lands in question. It is further stated that the petitioners have not approached the respondents for registration of the documents and if the petitioners approach the authorities and produce the documents for registration, they will receive the same and process the documents in accordance with law. He submitted that similar writ petition in W.P. No. 19575 of 2008 was disposed of by this Court by order dated 09.09.2008, directing the petitioners to produce the documents before the Sub-Registrar for registration, and upon such production, the Sub-Registrar shall receive the same process the documents in accordance with law. Since the Government are said to have not issued any fresh notiﬁcation prohibiting registration of the lands in question, and since similar writ petition in W.P. No. 19575 of 2008, was disposed of by this Court by order dated 09.09.2008, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition also with the self-same directions as made therein. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioners are directed to produce the documents before the 3rd respondent-Sub Registrar, Rajendranagar, who shall receive and process the same for registration, in accordance with law, if the same are otherwise in order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ N.V.RAMANA,J Dated: 24th September, 2008 KSR [1] AIR 2005 SC 3401