Shaik Jareena Basha v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Dated:14.09.2017 Between :

Shaik Jareena Basha S/o Mahaboob 50 years R/o Porumamilla village, YSR Kadapa district, AP .. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Stamps & Registration Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District & others .. Respondents This Court made the following:

- 2 - ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (AP).

Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in W P No.28849, 28856, 28857 & 28919 OF 2017 dated :29.08.2017. Learned counsel for petitioner has not disputed the same. The operative portion of order dated 29.8.2017 in WP No. 28849 of 2017 reads as under:

"6.

The entire issue concerning the scope of Section 22-A of the Act with regard to inclusion of certain properties in the list of prohibited properties and the scope of refusal of documents presented for registration, was considered by the Full Bench of this Court in Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 and in terms thereof, an aggrieved person has to apply to the District Collector with the supporting documents requesting him to exclude the properties claimed by him from the list of prohibited properties and unless and until the District Collector excludes the properties from the list of prohibited properties and furnishes the same to the registering authority, the registering authority cannot be compelled to accept the documents for registration and carry on registration of such documents. I therefore do not see any illegality on the part of the registering authority in not accepting the documents presented by the petitioners for registration. 1 2016 (2) ALD 236 (F.B)

- 3 - 7.

The Writ Petitions are dismissed leaving it open to the petitioners to avail the remedy of submitting an application before the District Collector as directed by the Full Bench of this Court in Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary at paragraph No.36 (ix) of the judgment. There shall be no order as to costs."

Following the same, this writ petition is dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioners to avail the remedy of submitting an application before the District Collector as directed by the Full Bench of this Court in Vinjamuri Rajagopala Chary at paragraph No.36 (ix) of the judgment. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these writ petitions shall stand closed. __________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J Date:14.09.2017 Tvk

- 4 - Dated:14.09.2017