IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 11675 of 2008 Between: 1 Meda Subbarayudu S/o Meda vengamunaiah R/o D. No. 47/80-13, Bose Nagar, Rayachoty, Town & Post, Kadapa District. 2 Saripiralla Bali Reddy S/o Saripiralla Nagabasi Reddy R/o D. No. 47/80-13, Bose Nagar, Rayachoty, Town & Post, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Rayachoty, Kadapa District. 2 Mandal Revenue Officer, O/o the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rayachoty, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ, one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropraite Writ, direction or order declaring the action of the ﬁrst respondent in not registering the land in an extent of Ac. 4.75 of land in Survey No.1170 of Masapeta Village of Rayachoty mandal, Kadapa District in favour of the proposed vendee Narasimha Reddy by the petitioners, inspite of No Objection Certiﬁcate in L.Dis No. 153/02, dated 08-06-2002 granted by the Second respondent, as arbtirary, illegal and unconstitutional, and consequently direct the ﬁrst respondent to register the land in an extent of Ac. 4.75 of land in Survey No. 1170 of Masapeta Village of Rayachoty Mandal, Kadapa District in favour of the proposed vendee Narasimha Reddy, by the petitioners, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proepr inthe circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.VISWANATHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 11675 of 2008 Order: By this writ petition, the petitioners are questioning the action of the 1st respondent-Sub-Registrar in not registering the land in an extent of Ac.4-75 cents in Survey No.1170, situated at Masapeta village of Rayachoty Mandal, Kadapa District, in favour of their proposed Vendee, namely Narasimha Reddy, in spite of ‘No Objection Certiﬁcate’ dated 08.06.2002, issued by the 2nd respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners state that one Nune Narayana was assigned land in an extent of Ac. 6-75 cents of land in Survey No.1170, situated at Masapeta village, Rayachoty Mandal, Kadapa District, vide proceedings in F.Dis.No.6/DKT/61, dated 02.08.1951 of the 2nd respondent, and since then, he and his family members had been in possession and enjoyment of the same. The petitioners state that after the death of Nune Narayana, his legal heirs, after obtaining necessary permission from the 2nd respondent-Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, vide Certiﬁcate dated 08.06.2002, and sold the said property to the petitioners, under a registered sale deed dated 17.10.2002. The petitioners state that out of an extent of Acs. 6-75 of land, they sold an extent of Ac.2-00 of land to one Galiveeti Venugopal Reddy, under a registered sale deed dated 10.02.2006, and now when they desired to sell the balance extent of Ac.4-75 cents of land to one Narasimha Reddy, and presented the document for registration, the 1st respondent refused to register the same on the ground that the said land is assigned land. Hence, questioning the said action of the 1st respondent as illegal and arbitrary, the petitioners ﬁled the present writ petition. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled by the 1 st respondent-Sub- Registrar, inter alia, stating that in the list of Government lands and assigned lands, furnished by the Mandal Revenue Officer, vide his letter dated 18.01.2007, the land in Survey No.1170 of Masapet village, was shown as Government land, and the Market Value Guidelines Register maintained by his oﬃce also disclosed that the land in Survey No.1170 is assigned land and the market value is shown as Zero, and therefore, the document for registration of the same was not entertained. The 2nd respondent-Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer also ﬁled his counter. It is stated in the counter aﬃdavit that a certiﬁcate was given by the then Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer, Rayachoty, in Ref. No.L.Dis.No.153/02, dated 08.06.2002, but the same was not traced in his oﬃce records. The other factual aspects with regard to earlier sale of Ac.2-00 of land out of total extent of Ac.6- 75 cents of land in Survey No.1170, made by the petitioners, by way of registered sale deed dated 17.10.2002, is not denied. According to the 2nd respondent-Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer the land in Survey No.1170 is classified as Government land, and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to sell the said land. Since the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled by the 2 nd respondent is not clear as to the assignment of land in question in favour of Nune Narayana, this Court on 25.07.2008, directed the 2nd respondent to appear in person before this Court along with relevant record. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent has appeared before this Court today, and produced the Re-settlement Register of Masapeta village, Rayachoty Mandal, kadapa District. A perusal of the said Re-settlement Register, which was prepared in the year 1910, would clearly indicate that an extent of Ac.114-52 cents is shown in Survey No.237, and Survey No.1170 to an extent of Ac.6-75 cents was sub-divided, and the said entry of sub-division was made on 10.07.1943. It is not known for what purpose the said division has taken place. However, the said entry made in the Re-Settlement Register corroborates with the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners that Nune Narayana, was assigned an extent of Ac.6-75 cents of land in Survey No.1170, vide proceedings F.Dis.No.6/DKT/61, dated 02.08.1951 of the 2nd respondent. In fact, the 2nd respondent has not denied the said assignment made in favour of the said Nune Narayana, in the year 1951. According to the provisions of A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, which came into force in the year 1977, there is no prohibition for sale of lands that were assigned prior to 1958, and which assignments did not contain a condition, with respect to non-alienation of the lands. In the instant case, the original assignee, was assigned the land in question in the year 1951, and in fact, the 1st respondent had entertained and registered a document in respect of a part of the said land in an extent of Acs. 2-00 earlier. Since the bar created for sale of assigned lands, is only with respect to lands assigned subsequent to 1958 and where there is a condition of non-alienation of the said land, and having regard to the fact that the land in question was assigned to original assignee in the year 1991, I am of the considered opinion that there can be no prohibition for alienation of the same, much less when the original assignee had already sold the land to the petitioner under registered sale deed. In that view of the matter, the contention of the respondents that the land in Survey No.1170 is classiﬁed as Government/Assigned land, and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to sell the same, is devoid of any merit. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The 1st respondent-Sub-Registrar is directed to receive and process the document to be presented by the petitioners, and register the same, if it is otherwise in order, without raising any objection that the land in question is Government/Assigned land. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 30.07.2008 Nsr