THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.13739 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner states that herself and her brother purchased land admeasuring Acs.4.82 cents in survey No.86/1 and Acs.2.23 cents in survey No.865 of K.Velamvaripalli Village, Pulivendula Mandal, Kadapa District, through two sale deeds, dated 16.04.1980 and 05.06.1985, respectively. Subsequently, the brother of the petitioner is said to have sold his share to the petitioner, and thereby, she became the owner of the entire land. She was also issued pattadar pass book and title deeds for the land, in the year 1995. The petitioner intended to sell part of the said land, and accordingly, submitted a sale deed before the Sub-Registrar, Pulivendula, the 3rd respondent, on 23.06.2009, for registration. The 3rd respondent refused to process the document, on the ground that the lands held by the petitioner were shown in the list of Government lands, furnished to him by the Tahsildar, Pulivendula, the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings, dated 13.02.2007. To that extent, he issued an endorsement, dated 23.06.2009. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the same. The petitioner contends that the lands were never held by the Government and the stand taken by the respondents is contrary to records. On behalf of the respondents, a counter-affidavit is filed. According to them, the land in two survey numbers, referred to above, was assigned, and the prohibition contained under Section 5 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, (for short ‘the Act’), operates against the lands. Heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The petitioner, no doubt, purchased the land, together with her brother, way back in the year 1980; particularly part of it in the year 1980 and the rest in the year 1985, from private individuals, by name, Balavenkatesu and Peddanaganna. However, if the lands are owned by the Government, or were assigned, the prohibition against alienation thereof, operates under Section 22-A of the A.P. Registration Act, on the one hand, and under Section 5 of the Act, on the other hand. It is a matter of record that, both the survey numbers, together with their extents, were included in the list of Government/assigned lands furnished by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent. As long as that list subsists, the 3rd respondent cannot ignore it. He cannot verify the correctness, or otherwise, of the inclusion of those lands. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the particulars furnished about the lands in the counter-affidavit are incomplete and vague, and on the strength of such particulars, the right of the petitioner to enjoy the land cannot be defeated. This Court finds it difficult to adjudicate such matters in a writ petition. The petitioner can certainly approach respondents 1 and 2, seek necessary particulars, about the lands, and make efforts to get them deleted from the list. If respondents 1 and 2 are not able to point out the date of assignment, the names of assignees and other relevant particulars, and the right of the petitioner to enjoy such lands, cannot be curtailed. The petitioner can approach respondents 1 and 2 with a proper application, in this regard. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to make a representation to the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer, as regards the circumstances under which the lands in survey Nos.86/1 and 865, came to be included in the list of Government lands. As and when such representation is made, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall verify the record and pass orders, determining the nature of the lands within a period of two months from the date of submission of the application. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.05.02.2010. GJ