IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No. 27276 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Yaseen, S/o. Mohd. Mahboob Ali, R/o. 13-17/1/A, Lingampally Nehru Nagar, Srilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District Having its Office at Khairtabad, Hyderabad., 2 The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabadf. 3 The Sub Registrar, SRO, Gopanapally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. .....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 Writ of Mandamus or any other proper writ or any other order or order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 to register the document of the petitioner in respect of land forming part of Survey NO. 124/KA admeasuring 4 acres situated at Gopanapally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, R R District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI DAMODAR MUNDRA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No. 27276 of 2008 ORDER: Petitioner claims to be absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land in Survey No.124/KA situated at Gopanapally Village of Serilingampally Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. He entered into an agreement of sale for the said land, and statedly, approached the third respondent for registration of the agreement of sale – cum – power of attorney in favour of the purchaser. Allegedly, third respondent refused to register the same on the ground that petitioner should obtain No Objection Certificate from the first respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. It is no doubt true that when a document is presented, it is incumbent on the part of the Registering Officer to examine the same with reference to Sections 31 to 36 of the Registration Act, 1908 (the Act, for brevity) and/or Rules 26 and 58 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Act. This aspect of the matter was considered by my learned brother Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy in W.P.No.15199 of 2004, dated 01.09.2004. Following the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent or any other Registering Officer to accept the document presented by the petitioner and consider for registration. Be it noted, if for any reason, the document presented is not registered, it is incumbent on the part of the Registering Officer to record and furnish reasons under Section 71 of the Act. Even thereafter, if the petitioner has any grievance, he may file appeal before the appellate authority under Section 72 of the Act. Thereafter, if any adverse order is passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner can file a suit under Section 77 of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 16.12.2008 vs To 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District Having its Office at Khairtabad, Hyderabad., 2 The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabadf. 3 The Sub Registrar, SRO, Gopanapally Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4 2CCs to G.P for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}