THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.19237 of 2014 Dated : 11.07.2014 Between:
O.Padmalatha, W/o Sridhar Reddy, 49 yrs., Household, R/o 5-11, Spandana Towers, Upparpalli Village, Tummalakunta G.P.
Tirupati Rural, Chittoor District and another .. Petitioners And The Joint Sub-Registrar-I Sri Balaji Registration District, Tirupati, Chittoor Distrct and others .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.19237 of 2014 ORDER :
With the consent of learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.
2. The petitioners state that they purchased some extents of land in Survey No.13 situated at Avilala Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Chittoor District from the owner of the said property. The petitioners approached the registering authorities for registration of the documents. The Sub-Registrar informed them that the said property cannot be admitted for registration since it is classified as ‘endowment land’ as per the letter of the Commissioner of Endowments Department v i d e Rc.No.N1/27520/2009, dated 19.04.2010.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the very same objection was raised on earlier occasion relying upon the same document. The said communication by the Commissioner, dated 19.04.2010, was challenged in W.P.No.10068 of 2013. The defence taken by the department in the said writ petition was that since the lands were classified as endowment lands, the registration is prohibited under Section 22-A(1)(c) of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’), and, therefore, the registration is not permissible. On consideration of the provisions of Section 22-A of the Act and the communication of the Commissioner, dated 19.04.2010, this Court held that in the absence of a notification under Section 22-A(2) of the Act, it is not open to the Endowments Department to communicate a list of properties allegedly owned by the religious institutions by way of a letter and trace the power to do so under Section 22- A(1)(c) of the Act. This Court further held that the said communication is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained and accordingly set aside the communication, dated 19.04.2010, and consequently directed the Joint Sub-Registrar, Tirupati, Chittoor District, to receive and process the documents presented by the petitioners therein in respect of their lands in Survey No.242/B of Tirupati Village, without reference to said communication.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, submits that in view of the decision of this Court invalidating the letter, dated 19.04.2010, the rejection by the Sub-Registrar to process the documents for registration of the lands purchased by the petitioners in Survey No.13 for the very same reason is illegal.
5. For the reasons alike as contained in judgment of this Court in W.P.No.10068 of 2013, dated 03.06.2013, this Writ Petition is also disposed of directing the Joint Sub- Registrar-I, Tirupati, Chittoor District (1st respondent), to receive and process the documents presented by the petitioners for registration in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, without reference to the letter of the Commissioner, dated 19.04.2010. If, however the 1st respondent is of the opinion that the documents presented for registration warrant denial, he shall pass orders in writing indicating the reasons for such refusal and communicate the same to the parties in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date : 11.07.2014 ssp