Judgment : 1. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.3 in taking action on the petitioner’s legal notice, dated 29.06.2013, issued for deletion of patta lands in Survey No.90 of Nizampet Village, Qutubullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District from the prohibitory list communicated by respondent No.3 to respondent No.4 vide proceedings bearing File No.B/583/2012, dated 17.02.2012. 2. The petitioner pleaded that Gandani Sailoo, Gandani Mysaiah and Gandani Ramaiah were the original pattadars of the lands in Survey Nos.90 and 94 of Nizampet Village, that the said pattadars were issued pattadar pass books and title deeds and that Gandani Sailoo and seven others have sold the land admeasuring Ac.1.26 guntas and Ac.0.19 guntas in Survey Nos.90 and 94 in favour of one Ch.Sudhakar Rao through registered sale deed, dated 17.02.1995, that Ch.Sudhakar Rao in turn sold the said land to one R.Srinivasa Rao under registered sale deed, dated 10.02.2005 and that the said R.Srinivasa Rao along with M/s.Sai Vijetha Developers developed a layout and sold the plots to various persons. The petitioner pleaded that he has purchased plot No.33 admeasuring 167 sq.yards in Survey Nos.90 and 94 from the developers through registered sale deed, dated 23.04.2005 and has been in possession of the same.According to the petitioner, the original pattadars have purchased the property in open auction held by the Tahsildar, Medchal under the provisions of the Laoni Rules, 1950 and that while for the year 1965-1966, pahani bears the name of laoni pattadar, the patta certificate could not be traced from the original owners or the subsequent owners. The petitioner further pleaded that his predecessor-in-interest and one R.Ramachander Rao, who purchased the land in Survey No.90, filed W.P.No.5439 of 2006 seeking laoni patta certificate and that in the said writ petition, the respondents took the plea that the assignment file was not available and the same will be supplied whenever the file was traced out. That the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by observing that the grievance of the petitioner was sufficiently redressed. That subsequently patta certificate has not been supplied. When the petitioner approached respondent No.4, he was informed that the land in question is in prohibitory list sent by respondent No.3. Questioning the inclusion of the petitioner’s plot in the prohibitory list, he has filed this writ petition. 3. That subsequently patta certificate has not been supplied. When the petitioner approached respondent No.4, he was informed that the land in question is in prohibitory list sent by respondent No.3. Questioning the inclusion of the petitioner’s plot in the prohibitory list, he has filed this writ petition. 3. This case was adjourned on 25.07.2013, to enable the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment) to file counter affidavit, but neither a counter affidavit is filed nor instructions have been reported. 4. Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short ‘the Act’) envisages prohibition of registration of certain documents. Sub-clause 1(b) of Section 22-A of the Act prohibits 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 Governments executed by persons other than those statutorily empowered to do so. Sub-clause (e) prohibits registration of documents pertaining to the properties which the State Government may by notification prohibit the registration. Evidently, with a view to prevent sale of the properties belonging to the State Government, a prohibitory list is prepared by the Tahsildar concerned and sent to the Sub-Registrar concerned to prevent sale of such properties. If the properties belonging to the Government are assigned to private persons containing a condition prohibiting alienation of the land, registration of the said land is prohibited by Section 5 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. Therefore, before inclusion of any land in the list prepared by the Tahsildar prohibiting registration, it must be satisfied that the land belongs to the Government and continued to vest in the Government or that the land is assigned with a condition of non-alienation. The initial onus, therefore, lies on the revenue functionaries to prove that the land is an assigned land with a condition prohibiting alienation. As held by this Court in Letter sent from Plot No.338, Parvant Nagar, Borabanda, Hyderabad and others v. Collector and District Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad and others ( 2008 (5) ALD 626 (DB), the lands assigned under Laoni Rules on market value are not prohibited from alienation. The relevant para reads as under: “Section 58 of the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act clearly demonstrates the Legislature never intended to impose ban on transfer of occupancy right granted. The relevant para reads as under: “Section 58 of the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act clearly demonstrates the Legislature never intended to impose ban on transfer of occupancy right granted. Section 58-A is an exception to Section 58, where State Government may by official notification notify in respect of any village or tract of the area to which the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act extends that the right of occupation of any land under Section 54 given after the date of notification shall not be transferable without obtaining the previous sanction of the Collector. For implementing the same, rules were made known as “The Laoni Rules” by the State Government. Rule 9(g) of the Laoni Rules does not prohibit alienation of the land. It only prescribes that on receipt of the full amount permission to occupy the land shall be given to the party in Form-G in duplicate and the signature of the allottee shall be obtained thereon along with date. One copy of the permission shall be given to the allottee and the Girdawar shall return the other copy with necessary endorsement of service along with record to the Tahsildar. The Girdawar shall personally serve all such notices and obtain acknowledgments and a memo shall also be given to the village officers to note in the village records the particulars of the land, the name of the person and the assessment to be recovered etc., and revenue shall be collected on the land, according to the rates so fixed till the akarband is finally corrected by the Survey and Settlement Department. If on the report of the local officers, the Collector finds that a proper price may not be secured by an auction or that there is likelihood of vested interests acting together and pushing up prices so as to make it impossible for the poorer classes to get the land at a fair price, the Collector may fix an upset price, and allot the land to the applicant without holding an open sale under Rule 9(h). Form-G, as referred to above, also specifies giving of written permission to occupy land (to be given by the Tahsildar under the Laoni Rules). Once the sale is confirmed, it is heritable and transferable under Section 58 of the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act. Form-G, as referred to above, also specifies giving of written permission to occupy land (to be given by the Tahsildar under the Laoni Rules). Once the sale is confirmed, it is heritable and transferable under Section 58 of the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act. The condition, if any, imposed for sale of unoccupied land on payment of market value under Form-G is till the sale is confirmed by the Collector, but not otherwise. Unless a notification notifying in respect of any village or tract of the area to which the Act extends prohibiting transfer of occupancy rights without obtaining previous sanction of the Collector, any condition prescribed for obtaining permission for occupation of land which was granted laoni patta on confirmation of sale by the Collector, which is governed by Section 58 of the Act has to be ignored and condition of inalienability under Form-G issued under Rule 9-g is inapplicable to the lands where occupancy rights/assignments granted on collection of market value and prior to issuance of notification under Section 58-A, if any.” (Emphasis added) 5. The fact that the land in question was permitted to be changed hands atleast on four occasions under registered sale deeds would prima facie show that there was no prohibition on alienation. When the petitioner’s predecessor-in-title filed W.P.No.5439 of 2006, the respondents came out with the stand that the assignment file bearing No.A3/6162/60 relating to Survey No.90 of Nizampet Village was not received from the erstwhile Medchal Taluq office and that as soon as the said file is traced out, copy of the proceedings will be supplied to the petitioner. It is the plea that till now, the file is not traced. I am at a loss to know as to how in the absence of file and without verifying whether any condition in the laoni patta granted in favour of the original pattadars prohibiting alienation existed, respondent No.3 could include the subject land in the prohibitory list after the same was sold by one person to the other as many as four times and the sale deeds were registered. As respondent No.3 has failed to discharge the initial burden lay on him, his action in including the subject land in the prohibitory list cannot be sustained. 6. As respondent No.3 has failed to discharge the initial burden lay on him, his action in including the subject land in the prohibitory list cannot be sustained. 6. Accordingly, respondent No.3 is directed to delete plot No.33 admeasuring 167 sq.yards in Survey Nos.90 and 94 of Nizampet Village, Qutubullapur Mandal from the prohibitory list sent to respondent No.4. Liberty is, however, given to respondent No.3 to re-include the subject plot in the prohibitory list in future, if and when he traces out the file, finds a clause in the laoni patta prohibiting alienation and a notification prohibiting alienation was issued under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli. However, before doing so, respondent No.3 shall issue show-cause notice to the petitioner and give him an opportunity of personal hearing. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. 7. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.26925 of 2013 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.