APHC010130272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6830/2025 Between: Palugulla Mohan Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A RAJENDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ASSIGNMENT 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in not deleting the lands admeasuring extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.114/1, Badinenipalle Village, Komaraolu Mandal Prakasam District from the list of prohibitory properties included U/s 22 (A) (1) (a) of Registration Act and not granting NOC is arbitrary, illegal and colourable exercise of power and contrary to the orders issued by the Government of AP apart from being violative of 300A of the Constitution of India and to issue a consequential direction to the 3 Respondent to delete the land to an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.114/1 situated at Badinenipalli Village of Komarolu Mandal of Prakasam District as per the report submitted by the 4th and 5 Respondents by granting NO Objection Certificate to the petitioner forthwith and to pass such other order or orders...” 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner is that while serving in the Indian Army, the petitioner submitted an application to the 3rd respondent, who subsequently issued a "D" form patta for an extent of Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.114/1 of Badinenipalli Village, Komarolu Mandal, Prakasam District, in the year 1999. Since then, the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the said property. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted applications/representations to the 5th respondent, i.e., the Tahsildar, on 24.02.2020 and 21.10.2021, requesting for the deletion of the subject property from the prohibited list under Section 22-A(1)(a) of the Registration Act, 1908. In pursuance thereof, the 5th respondent, by way of proceedings RCB.No.198/2020 dated 05.12.2020, addressed a letter to the 3rd respondent, directing the issuance of orders for the deletion of the subject property from the prohibitory list under Section 22-A(1)(a) of the Registration Act, 1908. Despite the lapse of 20 years, the 3rd respondent did not take any action to remove the petitioner’s property from the prohibitory list by issuing the necessary No Objection Certificate (NOC). Furthermore, even after receiving the petitioner’s applications/representations on 24.02.2020 and 21.10.2021, neither considered the representations/applications of the petitioner nor passed any orders in favour of the petitioner. Hence the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that, the 3rd respondent is the competent authority and he would consider the applications made by the petitioner by following the due procedure. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of by directing the 3rd respondent to consider the applications/representations of the petitioner, dated 24.02.2020 and 21.10.2021, for deletion of the subject property from the prohibited list notified under Section 22-A(1)(a) of the Registration Act, 1908 as expeditiously as possible, strictly in accordance with the law, preferably within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of this order. It is needless to mention that the 3rd respondent shall conduct a necessary inquiry by hearing all the concerned parties. 6. With the above direction the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 19.03.2025 klk 214 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.6830 of 2025 19.03.2025 kkllkk