IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 10251 of 2008 Between: M.Pullaiah, S/o. Polaiah, R/o. 16-62,Bypass Road, Nandyal, Krunool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Registrar Kurnool District, Kurnool 2 The Sub Registrar, Nandyal, Kurnool District, 3 The Tahsildar, Nandyal, Mandal, Kurnool District, ....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 a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in refusing the register the document pertaining to my property of an extent of Ac.0.69 cents of wet land situated in Sy.No.1849 of Nandyal town & Mandal, Kurnool District as illegal and contrary to the provisions under Sections 71 and 72 of Indian Registration Act and also contrary to the judgment of this Hon'ble Court reported in 2005 (4) ALD 539, and also illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to receive the document presented for registration and process the same in accordance with law uninﬂuenced by the instructions said to have been received from the 3rd respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.GIRIMOJI RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: ON BEING MENTIONED Initially when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, it was represented that similar writ petitions were disposed of by this Court following the judgment in P.Narasimha Reddy v. Sub-Registrar, Shameerpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District[1]. After the disposal of the writ petition by this Court on 10.6.2008, it was brought to my notice by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue that the subject matter of land is a wakf land and hence the wakf board is a necessary party and, therefore, the matter was posted for being mentioned. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned on two occasions on 17.6.2008 and 24.6.2008 at the request of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue to get instructions in the matter. Again on 8.7.2008, the name of the standing counsel for Wakf Board was printed in the cause list, and thereafter the matter was adjourned thrice i.e. on 18.7.2008, 25.7.2008 and 8.8.2008 at the request of the standing counsel for the Wakf Board. Even today also, when the matter is taken up, no counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled by the Wakf Board, and the learned standing counsel representing them, merely stated that the petitioner has not submitted any documents and only on apprehension that the documents to be presented by him, would not be entertained and rejected, has ﬁled the present writ petition. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Sub Registrar to receive the documents to be submitted by the petitioner and process the same in accordance with law, if the same is otherwise in order. If there is any objection with regard to the registration of the said document, the Sub-Registrar is directed to pass appropriate orders to that eﬀect and communicate the same to the petitioner. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. N.V.RAMANA, Dt.19.8.2008 msv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Registrar Kurnool District, Kurnool 2 The Sub Registrar, Nandyal, Kurnool District, 3 The Tahsildar, Nandyal, Mandal, Kurnool District, 4 2CCs to Govt.Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies [1] 2005 (2) ALD 807