IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7770 of 2009 Between: M/s. Castle Home Construction, Partnership form rep.by its partner Mohd.Mannan Siddiqui, S/o.Mohd.Osman Siddiqui R/o.H.No.12-2-790/141, Ayodyanagar colony Mehadipatnam, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad 2 The Sub-Registrar, Golconda, Hyderabad .....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 appropriate writ or order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not receiving the sale deeds for registration of flats constructed in premises H.No.12-2-506/1 Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad and registration of the sale deeds as illegal irregular, arbitrary, unconstitutional unjustified and unsustainable and direct the respondents to forthwith permit the registration of sale deeds for the flats in the said premises and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioner is a developer. It acquired 1200 sq. yards of land in premises No.12-2-506/1, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad, and constructed flats thereon duly obtaining permission from the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. It is stated that some of the sale deeds presented by the petitioner were admitted for registration by the second respondent. the petitioner complains that the second respondent refused to register the documents in respect of remaining flats. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The petitioner has placed before this Court a copy of letter dated 26.11.2008 addressed by the Sub-Registrar to the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad, the first respondent herein. Through that letter the second respondent sought clarification from the first respondent as to whether the apartments constructed by the petitioner are upon the retainable protected land, or the surplus land. On the plea of awaiting clarification through the said letter, the second respondent is not accepting the documents presented by the petitioner. Basically, the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 (for short ‘the Act’) stood repealed way back in the year 1998. Repeal came into force in the State of A.P. with effect from 28.03.2008. Further, the petitioner constructed the flats after obtaining permission from the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. The respondents are not supposed to verify the matter at every stage, particularly, when the construction was completed on the basis of permission. Since, the second respondent himself admitted certain documents in relation to flats constructed in the same blocks, there cannot be any justification to extend differential permission as regards to other flats. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the second respondent is directed to receive the documents presented by the petitioner, as regards to the flats constructed in premises No. No.12- 2-506/1, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad, and process the same without reference to the letter dated 26.11.2008. ______________________ (L. Narasimha Reddy, J.) 17th April, 2009 Note: C.C. in one week. (B/o) Js.