Avula Raju Yadav vs State Of Telangana

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent No.2 in non-releasing the pending Development Agreement cum General Power of Attorney vide Doc.No.189/2023 dated 08.11.2023 for plot No.14-A, to an extent of 415.55 yards in Sy.No.218/1 situated at Defence Colony within the limits of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, covered in Block No.37, Malkajgiri Circle and Mandal, Medchal – Malkajgiri District on the ground of respondent No.4 issued prohibition notification vide Lr.No.12/TPS/Cor-28/Sec-bad/GHMC/2022 dated 14.02.2022 as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct respondent No.2 to release the pending Doc.No.189/2023 dated 08.11.2023 without insisting NOC from respondent Nos.3 and 4.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4. Perused the record.

It is submitted by the petitioner No.1 that he is the absolute owner of the plot No.14-A, to an extent of 415.55 yards in Sy.No.218/1 situated at Defence Colony, whereas, petitioner No.2 is the Developer who has assured petitioner No.1 for undertaking construction of the building on the above said subject land. Thereafter, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 entered into Development Agreement – cum – General Power of Attorney and the same is presented before respondent No.2 to receive the document for registration, subsequently the said document was kept pending vide pending Doc.No.189/2023. However, respondent No.2 was not releasing the document and informed the petitioners to get NOC from respondent No.3 on the ground that respondent No.4 communicated the prohibition notification vide Lr.No.12/TPs/Cor-28/Sec-badZ/GHMC/2022 dated 14.02.2022 to respondent No.2.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that the Deputy City Planner i.e., respondent No.4 has no jurisdiction to stop the registration by requesting respondent No.2 i.e., the Sub-Registrar, Medchal-Malkajgiri District vide letter dated 14.02.2022 by number or sub-numbers in the said layout i.e., Defense layout on account of certain complaints received on the said properties.

Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 has placed a copy of instructions dated 16.12.2023 wherein respondent No.3 addressed a letter to respondent No.2 to give necessary clarification with respect to Plot No.14/A, at Sy.No.218/1 whether to register the plot or not to an extent of 415 sq.yds., Defence Colony, Malkajgiri. It is further submitted that one D.Nageshwara Rao and others have filed writ petition in W.P.No.29105 of 2023 before this Court seeking direction to the respondents to maintain 10% of total layout open space of the total site area i.e., Ac.112.03 gts as required under Rule 10-A of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (Layout) Rules, 1965 and that the matter is now subjudice before the Division Bench of this Court and hence after outcome of the said order, the Office will furnish the information regarding registration of the subject plot.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioner is not a party in the above said writ petition i.e., W.P.No.29105 of 2023 and that petitioner is questioning the letter issued by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 requesting not to register the subject plots. He would further submit that the subject land is a huge extent of land spreading upto Ac.112-03 gts.

Taking into consideration the above set of facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction to issue letter dated 14.02.2022 requesting respondent No.2 not to register the subject property and the same cannot be considered as prohibitory notification.

Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908, reads as follows:-

“Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded.—

(1) Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground that the property to which it relates is not situate within his sub-district, shall make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book No. 2, and endorse the words “registration refused” on the document; and, on application made by any person executing or claiming under the document, shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons so recorded.

(2) No registering officer shall accept for registration a document so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the document is directed to be registered.”

The Registering Authority is not empowered to refuse registration of document/s except under the circumstances mentioned under the Registration Act, 1908 and the Rules made thereunder. Also, as per the version of the petitioner, no reasons were assigned for not entertaining the document which was presented for registration by her. Therefore, this Court is of the view that directions, as prayed for, have to be given to the Public Authority directing it to perform its function as required under law.

Hence, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following direction:-

Registering Authority is directed to receive, register and release the document presented by the petitioner in respect of the subject land plot No.14-A, to an extent of 415.55 yards in Sy.No.218/1 situated at Defence Colony, the said document complies with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Registering Authority can refuse to register the document in case, the document is prohibited for registration under any of the provisions of law, Rules or Regulations made thereunder. However, the reasons assigned thereof and the decision taken shall be communicated to the petitioner in writing.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.