THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20882 of 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. In this writ petition, petitioners seek a mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in refusing to receive and register the sale deeds in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.1.63 cents covered by Survey Nos.565/2 to 565/4 of Kuchinapudi Village, Nizampatnam Mandal, Guntur District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioners that their maternal grand father, by name, P.R.Rao was the original owner of the aforesaid land. Later, the said land was settled in favour of their late father, by name, Y.Venkata Subba Rao. It is stated that there was a partition between the petitioners and the land in question was kept in joint. It is their grievance that though the said land is not declared as surplus, when they wanted to sell the same by presenting the documents for registration, the second respondent – Sub-Registrar, Repalle, Guntur District, is not receiving the same on the ground that there was a communication from the third respondent - Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenali. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents produced before this Court a copy of proceedings in C.C.No.1498/1558/1552/Rap/75, dated 21.11.2009, in which, it is merely stated that the land in Survey Nos.565/2 to 565/4 was determined in the holdings of original declarant, P.R.Rao, but it is not clearly stated that the said piece of land was declared as excess in the land ceiling proceedings. On written instructions, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents that the third respondent vide proceedings, dated 21.11.2009, instructed the second respondent not to entertain alienations in respect of the lands mentioned therein. Although it is not in dispute that originally, the lands were held by P.R.Rao, declarant, unless the said lands are declared as surplus and taken possession, they cannot be treated as Government lands. In any event, it is also submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents that no documents were presented by the petitioners before the second respondent for the purpose of registration. In the absence of any record to show that the land in question is a surplus land and as it is merely stated that the original owner has declared this land in the land ceiling declaration, I deem it appropriate to direct that if any document is presented by the petitioners for alienation of the land in question, the second respondent is directed to receive and consider the same for registration provided such document is in conformity with the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and the Registration Act, 1908. However, it is made clear that if there are any objections for such registration, the reasons shall be recorded and communicated to the petitioners as contemplated under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 30th AUGUST, 2010. kvni