Mr. Gosula Ravindra Reddy, v. The Principal Secretary (Revenue),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.18818 of 2015 BETWEEN Mr. Gosula Ravindra Reddy.

... PETITIONER AND The Principal Secretary (Revenue), State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MS. PULIPATI RADHIKA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Petitioner presented a sale deed for registration on 06.06.2015 before the third respondent seeking to register conveyance relating to

Sy.Nos.160/6, 7 and 8 of Kothapalli Panchayat, Modemeedipalli village, Proddutur Mandal, Kadapa District. Registration of the said document was refused by the third respondent on 09.06.2015 on the ground that the said survey numbers fall in the prohibited list of lands.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, placed reliance on the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer addressed to the third respondent in Ref.A/417/2010 dated 15.04.2010 wherein the very same survey numbers along Sy.Nos.160/4 and 5 were examined and the Tahsildar recommended to issue no objection certificate, as the said lands, which were village site poramboke, were sold to respective applicant on payment of market value and as such, the said lands having been assigned on market value, the Sub-Registrar was requested to accept registrations relating to the aforesaid lands.

3. There is nothing on record to show that the aforesaid letter of the RDO was brought to the notice of the third respondent. Hence, to shorten the litigation, I deem it appropriate to set aside the refusal endorsement and remit the matter to the third respondent for fresh consideration. Petitioner shall furnish a copy of the aforesaid letter of the RDO dated 15.04.2010 before the third respondent and the third respondent shall, thereafter, examine the letter and make appropriate enquiry from the revenue authorities and then take further action either for registering the document or otherwise for passing any other order. The writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J June 25, 2015 DSK