Judgment : The petitioners assail the Memo dated 30.1.2010 issued by the Sub-Registrar of Assurances and Registration, Bangarupalyam, Chittoor District, Respondent-3, calling upon them to get clearance from the Revenue authorities with regard to the land in S.No:205/5 of Mogili Venkatagiri Revenue village of Bangarupalyam Mandalam, Chittoor District, for getting their document registered. They seek a consequential direction to Respondent-3 to register the document presented by them in respect of the said land. It is the case of the petitioners that the predecessor-in-title of the 1st petitioner was granted a ryotwari patta under the A.P. (A.A.) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 by the Settlement Officer, Nellore in the year 1981. When the Director of Settlement, Hyderabad initiated suo-moto proceedings and cancelled the ryotwari patta in the year 2003, the 1st petitioner filed a revision before the Commissioner of Land Revenue, which was allowed by order dated 16.3.2006 upholding the order of the Settlement Officer, Nellore. Thereby, the ryotwari patta granted in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the 1st petitioner stood confirmed. It is stated that the order dated 16.3.2006 passed by the Commissioner, Land Revenue, Hyderabad has not been challenged till date. While so, the 1st petitioner being desirous of executing a registered sale deed in respect of this land in favour of the 2nd petitioner, approached the registration authorities. Thereupon, the impugned memo dated 30.1.2010 was issued by the Sub Registrar of Assurances and Registration, Bangarupalyam stating that the land in question is classified as ‘assigned land and cart track’ as per the revenue records submitted by the Tahsildar, Bangarupalyam and informing the petitioners to obtain clearance from the revenue authorities for getting the document registered. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the revenue authorities, the Tahsildar, Bangarupalyam, while admitting that the ryotwari patta issued to the predecessor-in-title of the 1st petitioner stood confirmed by the order of the Commissioner of Land Revenue dated 16.3.2006, stated that the matter had been referred to the Government for filing of a writ petition challenging the same. It is admitted by the learned Asst. Government Pleader for Revenue that no prohibition with regard to registration of documents relatable to Section 22 –A of the Registration Act, 1908 is extant, in so far as this land is concerned. It is admitted by the learned Asst. Government Pleader for Revenue that no prohibition with regard to registration of documents relatable to Section 22 –A of the Registration Act, 1908 is extant, in so far as this land is concerned. Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 reads as under: Section 22A: Prohibition of Registration of certain documents:- (1) The following classes of documents shall be prohibited from registration, namely ----- (a)documentsrelating to transfer of immovable property, the alienation or transfer of which is prohibited under any statute of the State or Central Government. (b)documents relating to transfer of property by way of sale, agreement of sale, gift, exchange or lease in respect of immovable property owned by the State or Central Government, executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so; (c)documents relating to transfer of property by way of sale, agreement of sale, gift, exchange or lease exceeding (ten) 10 years in respect of immovable property owned by Religious and Charitable Endowments falling under the Purview of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 or by Wakfs falling under the Wakfs Act, 1995 executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so; (d)Agricultural or urban lands declared as surplus under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 or the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. (e)Any documents or class of documents pertaining to the properties the State Government may by notification prohibit the registration in which avowed or accrued interests of Central and State Governments, local bodies, educational, cultural, religious and Charitable Institutions, those attached by Civil, Criminal, Revenue Courts and Direct and Indirect Tax Laws and other which are likely to adversely affect these interests. 2)For the purpose of clause (e) of Sub-section (1), the State Government shall publish a notification after obtaining reasons for and full description of properties furnished by the District Collectors concerned in the manner as may be prescribed. 3)Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Registering Officer shall refuse to register any document to which a notification issued under clause (e) of sub-section (1). 3)Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Registering Officer shall refuse to register any document to which a notification issued under clause (e) of sub-section (1). 4)The State Government either suo moto or on an application by any person or for giving effect to the final orders of the High Court of Andhra pradesh or Supreme Court of India may proceed to denotify, either in full or in part, the notification issued under sub-section (2). Therefore, unless there is a notification under Section 22-A (e) read with sub-section (2), the Government cannot claim that the land in question belongs to it and seek to stall the registration of documents. It is not the case of the Government that the registration of the subject document is prohibited by any statute so as to bring into play Section 22A (1) (a) of the Act of 1908. Further, it is not demonstrated that the prohibition enjoined by the other clauses in Section 22-A (1) has any operation in the present case. Without putting in place a prohibition sourced in law, it is not open to the authorities to stall the registration of documents. As the matter stands, the ryotwari patta granted in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the 1st petitioner continues to hold the field and there is no prohibition under Section 22-A of the Act of 1908 relating to the subject land. The action of the Registration authorities in seeking clearance of the revenue authorities is therefore without legal basis. The writ petition is accordingly allowed declaring that the insistence by the Sub-Registrar of Assurances and Registration, Bangarupalyam, vide his memo dated 30.1.2010, upon clearance from the Revenue authorities is illegal and without basis. There shall be a consequential direction to the Sub-Registrar of Assurances and Registration, Bangarupalyam, to register the document presented by the petitioners in respect of the property in S.No:205/5 of Mogili Venkatagiri village, Bangarupalyam Mandal, Chittoor District and release the same, subject to compliance with due procedure and formalities. There shall be no order as to costs.