IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 22701 of 2008 Between: 1.Vemuri Venkata Rajendra Prasad S/o. Baskara Ramaiah R/o. Pentaseema Bonangi Village, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. 2.Vemuri Rajini W/o. Murali Krishan R/o. Pentaseema Bonangi Village, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. 3.Vemuri Lava Kumari W/o. Bhaskara Ramaiah R/o. Pentaseema Bonangi Village, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Sub-Registrar Lankalapalem Visakhapatnam Dist. 2 The Dist. Registrar Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Dist. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate / Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to register the documents in respect of the extent owned by each of the petitioner in Sy.No.42/3; 42/5; 42/6; 42/7 & 42/9 of Pentaseema Bonangi Village of Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.P.RAMABRAHMAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.22701 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners claim to have presented certain documents in relation to the land in Survey Nos.42/3, 42/5, 42/6, 42/7 and 42/9 of Pentaseema Bonangi Village, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, before the first respondent for registration. Their grievance is that the documents are not received and processed, on the basis of instructions stated to have been issued by the second respondent. The petitioners seek directions against the second respondent to receive the documents in respect of the said land and to process the same in accordance with law. On behalf of the respondents, the first respondent filed a counter affidavit. He stated that the petitioners have not submitted any documents by the time the writ petition was filed. He further stated that the Tahsildar, Paravada had addressed a letter, dated 28.10.2007, to the effect that the lands in the above survey numbers are included in the list of assigned lands. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The necessity for this Court to examine the reasons for not receiving the documents or non-registration thereof by the first respondent would arise, if only the documents have been presented. In the counter affidavit, the first respondent has categorically stated that the petitioners did not submit any documents for registration. The Registration Act, 1908 and the Rules made thereunder prescribe the procedure for admitting the documents to registration. In case, there is any impediment for registering a document, the reasons therefor have to be communicated to the parties, so that they can avail the remedies available to them under law. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to receive any documents as and when presented by the petitioners and process the same in accordance with law. In case, the documents can be admitted to registration, he shall take necessary steps in that direction within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of presentation. On the other hand, if the documents cannot be admitted to registration, the reasons therefor shall be communicated to the petitioners within the same time. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.Narasimha Reddy, J Dt.02.03.2009 VGB