IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No : 25946 of 2001 Between: T.Subrahmanyam Naidu, S/o Raju Naidu, R/o Korla Kunta, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Sub-Registrar of Assurances And Registration, Renigunta, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction particularly Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to entertain the registration of the petitioner's lands of Ac.9-58 Cents in S.No.141 (New) or 26 (Old) of Damineedu Village in Tiruchanur Group of Villages, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.RAMACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.25946 OF 2001 ORDER: The writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ, Order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to entertain the registration of the lands of the petitioner admeasuring Ac.9-58 Cents in S.No.141 (New) or 26 (Old) of Damineedu Village in Tiruchanur Group of Villages, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District. The main grievance of the petitioner is that he and his predecessors in title are in possession of Ac.9-58 cents of land in S.No.141 (New) or 26 (old) in Damineedu village, Tirupati (Rural Mandal from times immemorial. The lands, which are Inam lands, were sold to his father by the then Inamdar Thadakamalla Naasinga Rao for a valid sale consideration of Rs.19,000/- on 19- 9-1955. Since then, these lands are under his cultivation and his father. Subsequently, the petitioner got inherited the property from his father and he is enjoying them in his individual capacity. The father of the petitioner and the petitioner are paying the land revenue regularly. Pursuant to the enactment of the A.P. (Andhra Area) Inams Abolition and conversion into Ryotwari Act, 1956, an enquiry was initiated by the Assistant Settlement Officer for grant of ryotwari patta. The Assistant Settlement Officer granted rough patta in favour of the petitioner for these lands on 18-8-1963. Basing on the said proceedings, the name of the petitioner is mutated in the revenue records and ryotwari pass book is issued in his favour. The petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of these lands for the last 45 years. When the petitioner is in dire need of money for his family necessities, he intended to sell these lands. In pursuance of the same, when the petitioner applied for valuation certificate to the respondent, he returned the application without any endorsement. Hence, he filed the writ petition. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent contending inter alia that the land admeasuring Ac.9.58 cents in S.No.141 of Daminedu village, falling in Renigunta Registration Sub-District is classified as “Tank Poramboku” in the market value guidelines Basic Register maintained by the Department. The information relating to classification of the land was furnished by the Revenue Authorities in August, 1998, during the course of Revision of Market Value guidelines. In the latest extract of Adangal certified by the M.R.O on 10-01-2002 also, the above land is classified as “Government land”. In Government Memo No.1609/U2/87-1 Rev (U) Dept. dated 22.5.1987 communicated in I.G’S Endt. No.G1/13110/1987 dated 24.5.1987 and Commissioner and Inspector General’s Memo No.XI/6682/96 dated 10-6-1996, instructions were issued not to register any document effecting Government lands. These instructions were reiterated in Commissioner and I.G’s Memo No.G1/20870/1997 dated 5-7-1997. The petitioner has not presented any document for registration with regard to the land in S.No.141 of Daminedu village in this office. Therefore, the writ petition is a premature one. I have perused the material available on record. The main grievance of the petitioner is that when he applied to the respondent for issuance of a valuation certificate, his application has been returned without any endorsement. If that being the case, the action of the respondent in returning the application without any endorsement or orders, amounts to arbitrariness. In this view of the matter, I feel it is a fit case wherein the respondent can be directed to consider the request of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. However, if any application as to the request of the petitioner is not pending with the respondent, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh application before the respondent within a period of two (2) Weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and after filing the said application, the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of two (2) months. Subject to the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ________________________ Justice G.CHANDRAIAH Dated 23rd April, 2009. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.25946 OF 2001 Dated 23rd April, 2009