1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2590/1996 (Smt. Manju Tak Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) Date of order : 05.02.2009 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Kailash Trivedi, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the endorsement made by Sub- Registrar with regard to pendency of reference before the Additional District Collector, Pali. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per Section 58 of the Registration Act, 1908, no such endorsement can be made by the Sub-Registrar at the time of registering the documents. Further, it is prayed that as per Rule 39, the registering officer cannot question the validity of the documents. I have perused the pleadings as well as Section 58 of the Rajasthan Registration Act as well 2 as Rule 39 of the Rajasthan Registration Rules, 1958. Admittedly, the Sub Registrar after registering the documents handed over the documents to the petitioner. He has not refused to register the documents nor he has questioned the validity of documents. The circular dated 4.9.1993 was issued by the Inspector General, Stamps and Registration Department, Ajmer whereby a ban was imposed for not registering any documents after issuance of the notification dated 4.9.1993. But in this case the document has been handed over to the petitioner after due registration, therefore, no question of quashing Annexure-3 notification issued on 4.9.1993 by the D.I.G., Stamps, Registration, Ajmer. Further, vide Annexure-4 dated 3.7.1996 the only direction has been given by the Registrar to the Sub Registrar, Stamps, Sojat that at the time of registration of documents with regard to the documents for which reference is pending, an endorsement shall be made upon the documents. In my opinion when reference is pending with regard to the land in question then there is no illegality in making endorsement by the sub Registrar at the time of registering documents. The petitioner is not disputing that no reference is pending. Moreover, the petitioner is only making prayer that such endorsement cannot be made in view of Section 58 of the Act, 1908 so also as per Rule 39 of the Rules of 1955. In my opinion, both these provisions of law, 3 which is section 58 of the Act and Rule 39 are totally irrelevant for the purpose of making endorsement upon the documents which is questioned by the petitioner in this writ petition. Section 58 is with regard to making endorsement at the time of making registration by Sub-Registrar, Stamps. There is no bar imposed in the Act for not putting such note with regard to pendency of reference likewise section 39 provides that validity of the documents cannot be questioned. Obviously in this case the Sub Registrar has not questioned the validity of the documents more so he has registered the documents and returned to the petitioner but only endorsement was made with regard to pendency of the reference. In this view of the matter, no case is made out for interference. Hence, petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun