THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3729 OF 2009 11.06.2010 Between: Kayamkhani Rashidha Begum and others. ….Petitioners AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Revenue Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad, and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.3729 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioners filed instant writ petition invoking certiorari jurisdiction of this Court and pray to quash communication vide Reference No.B/386/2006, dated 20.10.2006 of fourth respondent to fifth respondent. By the said communication, fourth respondent informed that as many as thirty-three pieces of agricultural lands (field numbers) comprised in different survey numbers admeasuring Acs.280.48 cents are Government lands and requested not to entertain any transactions for registration until further correspondence. The relief is sought inter alia on the ground that it is not competent for Tahsildar under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (Assigned Lands Act, for brevity) and Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 2007 (the Rules, for brevity) to address the registering authority requesting not to register in respect of the lands alleged to be Government lands. The petitioners project their case as follows. One A.K.Bashamiyya occupied Government land admeasuring Acs.5.88 cents in survey No.580/3 of Rayachoty Village. He developed it for the purpose of cultivation. The Then Tahsildar, Rayachoty, assigned land to him on 21.12.1951. The same was sold under registered sale deed being document No.3016 of 1964, dated 18.11.1964 to Chilakala Bashu Sab and Patan Khadar Khan, who divided the land into two parts i.e., Acs.2.94 cents each. Patan Khadar Khan sold Acs.1.47 cents to Mayana Safiullakhan under registered document dated 31.12.1979 and remaining extent of Acs.1.47 cents to Mayana Husmath Jhon @ Fathimunnisa under sale deed. These two purchasers together sold the property in favour of first petitioner herein under registered document dated 28.06.1982. The fourth respondent issued Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds (PPBs) vide proceedings, dated 14.04.1997. Subsequently, first petitioner sold Acs.0.30 cents in favour of petitioners 6 and 7 and Acs.183 1/3 square yards in favour of eighth petitioner. First petitioner also executed settlement deed in favour of her children i.e., petitioners 2 to 5 herein. All the purchasers are in possession of the land and enjoying the same as the land in due course of time has been converted into house sites. Fourth respondent issued proceedings Ref. No.B/386/2006, dated 20.10.2006 prohibiting registrations. The writ petition was admitted on 26.02.2009 and W.P.M.P.No.4850 of 2009 seeking suspension of impugned order was dismissed. Respondents have not filed any counter affidavit and as the matter is covered by Judgment of this Court in Dr.G.Shiva Prasad Reddy v District Collector, Visakhapatnam District[1], the same is being disposed of with consent of counsel for petitioners and Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Andhra Area) after hearing submissions made by both of them. Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act, prior to its amendment, reads as under. 5.Prohibition of registration of assigned lands:- Notwithstanding anything in the Registration Act, 1908 (C.A.16 of 1908) on or after the commencement of this Act, no Registering Officer shall accept for registration any document relating to the transfer of, or the creation of any interest in, any assigned land included in a list of assigned lands in the district which shall be prepared by the District Collector and furnished to the Registering Officer except after obtaining prior permission of the District Collector concerned for such registration. In Dr.G.Shiva Prasad Reddy (supra), this Court considered the question whether it is competent for Tahsildar to send a list of lands which are allegedly assigned lands to the Registering Officer requiring prior permission for registration. In that case, based on communication of Tahsildar, the registering authority refuses to entertain a sale deed for registration and kept pending on the ground that the land was assigned by way of D-Form patta. This Court found that there was no delegation of power to Tahsildar nor statute permits the District Collector to delegate the power under Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act and observed as under. Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act contains non obstante clause. It renders Registration Act in applicable to the assigned lands. No Registering Officer can accept registration of any documents relating to transfer of assigned land, provided, such assigned land is included in the list of assigned lands in the districts prepared by the District Collectors. Here again, clearly, the power is vested only in the District Collector and the power to delegate to any authorized officer is very conspicuous by its absence. Indeed, Rule 4 of the Rules, on which abundant emphasis is laid, refers to only the duty of the assigning officer to send a copy of the assignment order to the Registration Department, and it does not in any manner amount to District Collector delegating the power under Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act to the “authorized officer”. Therefore, in the absence of specific legislative sanction; authorizing the delegatee to further delegate the letter of the District Collector dated 31.01.2006 advising all the Mandal Revenue Officers in the districts to supply updated list of assigned lands is ultra vires the power of the District Collector under Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act. On this ground alone, the impugned letter/proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer should suffer from incurable infirmity. However, it is always open to the District Collector to send/notify the list of assigned lands to the Registering Officers in the district and continue to update such list. This Court also hastens to add that having regard to the purpose for which the Legislation was made, and also having regard to Rule 4 of the Rules, if the Mandal Revenue Officer sends a copy of the assignment order to the Registering Officer, the Registering Officer should prevent registration of any document relating to transfer of assigned lands. After the Judgment of this Court in Dr.G.Shiva Prasad Reddy (supra), Andhra Pradesh State Legislature amended Section 5 substituting with the new provision which reads as under. 5. Prohibition of registration of Assigned Lands:- (1) The District Collector or any other Officer, not below the rank of a Mandal Revenue Officer authorized by him in this behalf, shall within 45 (forty five) days from the date of commencement of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) (Amendment) Act, 2007 furnish to the Registering Officer having jurisdiction over the area a list of lands assigned to the landless poor persons with all particulars of assignment and further furnish such particulars of new assignment forthwith. (2) Notwithstanding anything in the Registration Act, 1908, no Registering Officer shall accept for registration of any document relating to the transfer of or creation of any interest in any assigned lands as furnished in the list under sub- section (1). Therefore, by reason of Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) (Amendment Act, 2007, it is competent for the District Collector or an officer authorized by him to send/communicate the list of assigned lands. In which event, no registration can be made without prior permission of the District Collector. Here, it is necessary to refer to relevant Rules. The Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 1977 promulgated vide G.O.Ms.No.281, dated 02.02.1978 were superceded by the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules 2007, which were promulgated vide G.O.Ms.No.208, dated 22.02.2007. Rule 2(b) of the Rules defines ‘authorised officer’ means ‘the officer authorised by the District Collector not below the rank of Mandal Revenue Officer/Tahsildar under sub-section (1) of Section 4 and sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act’. Reading Section 5(1) of the Assigned Lands Act and Rule 2(b) of the Rules together, it becomes clear that only an officer above the rank of Mandal Revenue Officer/Tahsildar who is specifically authorised by District Collector can furnish list of assigned lands to registering officer, in which event, Section 5(2) of Assigned Lands Act prohibits registration. In this case no material is placed before this Court to accept the plea that there has been delegation of powers by the District Collector to the Tahsildar. Even if such delegation exists at the relevant time, when the impugned order was issued on 20.11.2006 there was no power vested in the District Collector to delegate the power to Tahsildar under Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act. Therefore, communication sent by fourth respondent to fifth respondent is wholly without competence and therefore, a writ of certiorari shall issue. In the result, for the above reasons, the impugned communication, vide Ref.No.B/386/2006, dated 20.10.2006 is quashed observing it shall be open to the District Collector, Kadapa, or any officer not below the rank of Tahsildar as authorized by District Collector to send the list of assigned lands in Rayachoty Mandal to the Registering Authority for giving full effect to Section 5 of the Assigned Lands Act. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 11.06.2010 Pln [1] 2007 (2) ALD 519