IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.26989 of 2014 BETWEEN B.Ramachandra Reddy AND ... PETITIONER The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others ...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner claims that he has purchased land to an extent of Ac.1-00 cent in survey No.114/1 of Mangalam Village, Tirupathi Urban Mandal, Chittoor District, from his vendor P.Murali Krishna under registered sale deed bearing document No.2536/2004, dated 06.01.2005. He states that total extent of said survey number is to an extent of Ac.1-08 cents situated at Mangalam village, Tirupati Urban Mandal at Chittoor District. While the petitioner claims to be in possession and enjoyment, the grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that when he approached respondent No.4 for obtaining market value certificate for alienation of the said property, respondent No.4 issued a certificate dated 02.07.2014 stating that the aforesaid land is one of the lands communicated by the Tahsildar, among the list of lands prohibited for registration. Petitioner states in the affidavit that he has the title from his vendor and his vendor’s vendor etc., and as such, the said land is always a patta land and accordingly recorded in the revenue record also, but appears to have been wrongly included in the list of prohibited lands by respondent No.3-Tahsildar. Hence, the present writ petition is filed challenging the action of respondent No.3 in including the petitioner’s land in the list of prohibited lands for registration.
3. Learned Government pleader has secured instructions from respondent No.3, wherein it is fairly stated that as per the fair adangal the classification of land in survey No.114/1 admeasuring Ac.1-00 cent is classified as patta dry. It is further submitted that the subject lands stands registered in the name of B.Ramachandra Reddy to the extent of Ac.1-00 vide 10(1) patta No.704 and Ac.0-08 cents of land stands in the name of P.Anandamma vide 10(1) patta No.162. it is, therefore, stated that subject land is purely classified as patta land.
4. The instructions, however, do not say as to how it got included in the list of prohibited lands and in view of the fair statement on behalf of respondent No.3 that the aforesaid land is a patta land, it appears that inclusion of the same in the list of prohibited category by respondent No.3 appears to be a mistake.
5. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
1. Petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation to respondent Nos.2 and 3 tracing his title to the said land.
2. On receipt of the said representation, respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall look into the grievance of the petitioner and based upon such enquiry and decision, they shall take steps with regard to modification/deletion/amendment of the list sent to respondent No.4-Sub-Registrar with regard to prohibited categories of land.
3. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to complete the aforesaid exercise expeditiously and, in any case, within three months from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioner, as directed above.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 24, 2014 LMV