IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3668 of 2009 Between: Ch. Kalyan, S/o. Kotaiah Naidu, R/o. Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Sub Registrar, Registrar Office, Nellore. .....RESPONDENT 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in withholding an Agreement of Sale-cum-GPA vide document P.No. 1253/2008 dated 19-05-2008 and the Sale Deed vide document P.NO. 1232/2008 dated 21-05-2008 presented for registration in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Nellore is illegal, arbitrary and contrary tothe provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and consequently direct the respondent to release the Agreement of Sale-Cum-GPA vide document P.No. 1253/2008 dated 19-05-2008 and Sale Deed vide document P.No. 1232/2008 dated 21-05-2008 forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: The petitioner purchased two items of property vide documents dated 19-05-2008 and 21-05-2008 respectively. The sale deeds were presented to the Sub-Registrar, the respondent herein, for registration. They were given P.Nos.1253 of 2008 and 1232 of 2008. Petitioner states that though nearly nine months have elapsed, the respondent has not released the sale deeds nor did he assign reasons for withholding the documents. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. On the one hand, the Government streamlined the process and procedure for registration of documents, treating the same as an important source of revenue and on the other hand, every possible hurdle is being created. By and large, the registering authorities are active and liberal in computing the stamp duty and registration fee as well as collecting them. Once the amount is collected and put in the State coffers, they exhibit their typical red tapism. In case transaction is not capable of being registered, the parties can certainly be informed, so that they can take a decision whether to present the document for registration at all. Persuading the parties to pay substantial amount towards stamp duty and registration charges on the one hand and keeping the document indefinitely, is nothing but unfair and arbitrary exercise of power. Even if there exists any definite and valid reasons for withholding the documents, fairness demands that the respondent informs the same in writing. For all practical purposes, the respondent can be said to have temporarily misappropriated the amount deposited by the petitioner as long as the documents are not released or the reasons are not furnished. The procedure adopted by the respondent cannot be appreciated and deserves to be deprecated. The writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondent shall either release the documents presented by the petitioner after registration, within two weeks from today or in case respondent comes across any legal hurdle in releasing the documents, he shall communicate the reasons within the same time. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dated 25th February, 2009 vrn