Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 333 (AP)

T. Balaji v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2019-11-21

U.DURGA PRASAD RAO

body2019
ORDER : U. Durga Prasad Rao, J. 1. The petitioner seeks a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in declining to receive and accept the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of land in an extent of Ac. 4.89 cents in S. No. 885 of Amarapuram Village Polam, Amarapuram Mandal, Anantapur District as arbitrary and violation of G.O. Ms. No. 575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018 and for consequential direction. 2. The petitioner's case, briefly, is that he is the owner of Ac. 4.89 cents of land in S. No. 885 of Amarapuram village. Originally, an extent of Ac. 6.11 cents of land in S. No. 885 of Amarapuram village is assigned to one Pujari Cholaiah vide proceedings in D.A. Dis. No. 199/46 dated 15.06.1937 under DC quota and after his death, his legal representatives sold the land to T. Thimmaiah under a registered sale deed dated 11.01.1984 and after his demise the property is devolved on his wife namely, Usha Devi and the petitioner purchased an extent of Ac. 5.70 cents of land under a registered sale deed dated 11.03.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner sold some extent in the same survey number in the year 2017 by way of registered sale deed. Now he wants to sell the remaining extent and therefore, he entered into an agreement of sale on 01.11.2019 and when himself and the purchaser approached the 4th respondent, he refused to receive and register the document on the ground that the land in question is assigned land and therefore, the petitioner has to obtain NOC. The petitioner claims that there is no prohibition for sale of assignment land after a period of 10 years of assignment and in fact, he already sold some extent in the year 2017. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Stamps & Registration representing the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the objection raised by 4th respondent is untenable in view of G.O. Ms. No. 575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018 and since the assignment was made in favour of original assignee in the year 1937, there can be no objection for registration. 5. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for petitioner. G.O. Ms. No. 575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018 says thus: 4. No. 575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018 and since the assignment was made in favour of original assignee in the year 1937, there can be no objection for registration. 5. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for petitioner. G.O. Ms. No. 575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018 says thus: 4. The Spl.C.S.& Chief Commissioner of Land Administration has suggested that all assignments made prior to 18-06-1954 may be considered for deletion from the purview of Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908 as there was no condition of non-alienation. The condition of non-alienation to non-British subjects may be ignored as it is irrelevant at present. The clear statement about the assigned lands prior to 18.06.1954, will settle a number of land matters and court cases being faced by the Revenue Department. 5. After careful examination of the matter, Government hereby order for deletion of Government lands assigned prior to 18.06.1954 from the purview of Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908. 6. In the instant case, assignment was made in favour of original assignee Pujari Cholaiah vide proceedings in D.A. Dis. No. 199/46 dated 15.06.1937 and since the assignment was made prior to 1954 and by virtue of G.O. Ms. No. 575 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 16.11.2018, the subject land can be deleted from the list of prohibited properties covered under Section 22-A of Registration Act, 1908. 7. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 4th respondent to receive the sale deed from the petitioner and register the same in accordance with law, without insisting for NOC. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.