THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.22071 of 2011 ORDER: Questioning the action of the 4th respondent in refusing to register the sale deeds presented by the petitioners who seek to alienate the lands in Sy.Nos.646/3 of an extent of Ac.3-60 cents, Sy.No.648/1 of an extent of Ac.1-00 cents and Ac.2-50 cents in Sy.No.625 of Kopparthy village, Cinthakommadinne Mandal, Kadapa City, YSR District on the ground that they are shown as assigned lands in the list furnished by the 3rd respondent, as arbitrary and illegal, the present Writ Petition is filed. In paragraph 3 of the counter affidavit filed by the Tahsildar it is stated that the lands in Sy.Nos.625 and 648 are patta lands. It is thus evident that the petitioners’ request for registration of the lands in Sy.Nos.648/1 and 625 cannot be rejected on the ground that the lands belong to the Government. The only extent which is disputed by the respondents is an extent of Ac.3-60 cents in Sy.No.646/3. In the counter affidavit it is stated that an extent of Ac.10-73 gts in Sy.No.646 is classified as Government land (……..). On being asked as to which law requires these dots to be considered as Government land, Learned G.P. for Revenue (Andhra & Rayalaseema areas) would state that when a survey of all lands was conducted in the year 1908, all lands for which claims were made were decided, and those lands which are not claimed were shown as “…………” in the survey records. He would fairly state that there is no law governing this aspect. This Court in Madiga Papamma v. State of A.P.[1] and Koona Subbaramaiah Shetty v. State of A.P.[2] held that mere dots in the RSR was not sufficient to support the claim of the respondents that the lands in question were not patta lands, and that such dots did not constitute proof of title. In any event mere registration of a conveyance deed does not create any title in the transferee and, if the Government is of the view that the property belongs to it, it can always assert its title and claim the property in accordance with law. In such circumstances, I consider it appropriate to direct the 4th respondent to receive the documents presented by the petitioners in so far as they relate to Sy.Nos.625, 648/1 and 646; and consider their request for registration in accordance with law, and in terms of the observations made hereinabove, within a period of two months from the date on which the documents are presented by the petitioners for registration. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. ___________ 24-11-2011 Note: Issue C.C. in one week B/o asp [1] 2011 (2) ALD 487 [2] Judgment in W.P.No.16434 of 2010 dated 29.9.2010