THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.8801 of 2009 ORDER: Smt. A. Pydamma, and K. Sadhu Rao, the 4th respondent, herein held different extents of land, including the one, in Sy.No.161/12, admeasuring 50 cents, and 161/4B, admeasuring 92 cents, at Chinagantyayda Village. That village was part of Visakhapatnam Urban Agglomeration. The petitioners herein intended to purchase the two extents, referred to above. Therefore, a joint notice by the proposed vendors and vendees was issued, under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’), to the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, the 2nd respondent herein. The 2nd respondent made an endorsement on 22-01-2007, to the effect that they do not intend to exercise the first option to purchase the property. Accordingly, sale deeds were executed, in favour of the petitioners, on 11-07-2006. Disputes arose between the petitioners on the one hand, and the respondent No.4, on the other hand. The same led to the filing of O.S.Nos.212 and 213 of 2003, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka. The 4th respondent submitted a representation dated 26- 07-2007 to the 2nd respondent, alleging that the endorsement made on the notice, under Section 26 of the Act is not proper. Acting on the same, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter dated 10-08-2007 to the District Registrar, Visakhapatnam, requesting them not to register the sale deeds, in respect of the lands purchased by the petitioners. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, and learned counsel for the 4th respondent. Before purchasing the property mentioned above, the petitioners as well as their vendors approached the 2nd respondent by serving a notice under Section 26 of the Act. It is competent for the Government to exercise the first option, to purchase the property, which is part of Urban Agglomeration. An endorsement was made by the 2nd respondent, to the effect that he does not intend to exercise the first option. On the basis of the endorsement, sale deeds were executed in favour of the petitioners. Assuming that there is any defect, illegality or infirmity in the endorsement made by him, the 2nd respondent ought to have initiated proceedings for withdrawal or cancellation thereof. He has not chosen to do so. On the other hand, he proceeded to straightaway address the impugned letter to the District Registrar, Visakhapatnam, requesting him, not to register the documents, that may be presented by the petitioners, in respect of the land purchased by them. The impugned letter is not referable to any provision of law. The manner in which the document can be registered, and the circumstances under which the registration can be refused, are dealt with under the Registration Act, 1908, and the Rules made thereunder. The petitioners did not violate any provision of law, nor their land is hit by the prohibition of any kind, such as the one, under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, or Section 5 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. As pointed out earlier, the 2nd respondent has not even chosen to issue any show cause notice to the petitioners, proposing to cancel the endorsement made by him, under Section 26 of the Act. For all practical purposes, he has just succumbed to the pressure exerted by the 4th respondent, and created hurdle, in the exercise of ownership rights by the petitioners. Be that as it may, assuming that it was possible for the 2nd respondent to annul the endorsement made by him, permitting the sale in favour of the petitioners, as on the date on which he addressed the impugned letter, that possibility does not exist now. The Act stood repealed, in relation to State of Andhra Pradesh, with effect from 27- 03-2008. Viewed from any angle, the impugned letter cannot be sustained in law. The writ petition is accordingly allowed, and the impugned letter is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.29-04-2009. KO