IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.15037 of 2014 Between:
M/s. Sri Balaji Old Tyre Merchant, Rep. by its Proprietor D. Ratnavelu S/o. Dhanakoti, Aged about 27 years, R/o. 19-3-12/1A, Srinivasapuram, Renigunta Road, Tirupathi, Chittoor District.
.. Petitioner AND The Government of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department (Registration), Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others .. Respondents The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.15037 of 2014 ORDER:
The case of the petitioner is that the land to an extent of Ac. 26.00 cents which was covered by Survey No.74/7 of Akkarampalli Village belongs to Government land and the same was alienated to Tirupati Urban Development Authority. The Tirupati Urban Development Authority has handed over the said land to Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (for short ‘the APIIC’) for the purpose of establishment of Auto Nagar. The APIIC divided the land into plots. The petitioner purchased Plot No.63. As the petitioner intend to register the property in his name, he approached the Registrar, Stamps and Assurances, Balaji Registration Office, Tirupathi, Chittoor District (4th respondent), who in turn refused to receive the document on the ground that the registration was stopped in respect of the land in Survey No.74 of Akkarampalli Village.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land concerning the very same survey number is the subject matter of issue before this Court in several writ petitions. In W.P.No.14439 of 2011, plots purchased by the petitioner therein situated in Survey No.74/7 agitated before this Court against the action of the respondent authorities in not processing the document for registration. This Court disposed of the said writ petition by order, dated 19.01.2012, and observed that the respondent authorities have no right to prevent the petitioner therein from enjoying his absolute rights and consequently directed respondents 1 to 5 that they shall not have any right to prevent any transaction by the petitioner vis-à-vis the plot allotted to him by the 5th respondent.
3. Following the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of holding that respondents 1 to 4 shall not have any right to prevent any transaction by the petitioner vis-à-vis the plot allotted to him by the APIIC. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 3rd June, 2014 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.15037 of 2014 Date: 3rd June, 2014 KL