THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.5574 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner states that she purchased Ac.3.40 cents of land in Sy.No.303 of Palkur Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Kurnool District, from one Sri K. Chinna Rama Subba Reddy, through sale deed dated 28-06-2003. On an application submitted by the petitioner, the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Kurnool, granted lease to quarry lime stone black over an extent of one hectare, i.e. 2 ½ acres, for a period of ten years, vide proceedings dated 20-10-2001. The petitioner intended to sell the land in favour of third parties. She states that the A.P. Wakf Board, the 3rd respondent herein, is interfering with the mining activity, and that respondents 1 and 2 are not entertaining the documents presented by her, for transfer of the land. Pointing out that grievance, she has filed this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue, and learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent. The petitioner filed the copy of the sale deed, through which she purchased the land, as well as the lease granted to her, by the Department of Mines and Geology. If the land was held by the vendor of the petitioner, neither the 3rd respondent is entitled to interfere with the activity, nor respondents 1 and 2 can refuse to register the documents, presented by the petitioner, for transfer. Even according to the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 are refusing registration of the documents, by placing reliance upon Section 22-A of the Registration Act. That provision prohibits registration of documents, in respect of lands held by State and Central Governments, Endowment Department, or the lands held by Wakfs. The respondents have placed before this Court, copy of the A.P. Gazette, dated 02-05-1963, under which an extent of Ac.17.58 cents of land in Sy.No.303 was notified as the property of Wakfs’, by name, Mulla Farid Saheb and Mulla Sayed Hussain, of Banaganapalli, Kurnool District. As long as this notification stands, the petitioner cannot object to the refusal by respondents 1 and 2 to entertain a document, in respect of that land. If the petitioner is so advised, she has to assail the notification, or seek declaration over the lands. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.25-01-2010. KO