APHC010372582019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION N Between: Chalapati Srinu, S/o Late Panduranga Rao, Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Rajupeta Village, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by it's Principal Secretary, Revenue Department District. 2. The SubRegistrar, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. Counsel for the Petitioner Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the respondents. 2. The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of respondent No.2 in not receiving, registering and releasing the document in respect of and extent of Ac.1.67 cents situated in Survey No.174/1 of Bandar East, Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary, etc., and for consequential directions. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION N0.17785 of 2019 Chalapati Srinu, S/o Late Panduranga Rao, Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Rajupeta Village, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by it's Principal Secretary, (Registration and Stamps) Velagapudi, Guntur 2. The SubRegistrar, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Dr.Ananth S Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Revenue G.P. for Registration and Stamps The Court made the following ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of respondent No.2 not receiving, registering and releasing the document in respect of and extent of Ac.1.67 cents situated in Survey No.174/1 of Bandar East, Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary, etc., and for consequential directions. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Chalapati Srinu, S/o Late Panduranga Rao, Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Rajupeta Village, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. ...Petitioner 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by it's Principal Secretary, (Registration and Stamps) Velagapudi, Guntur ...Respondents for Registration and Stamps Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of respondent No.2 not receiving, registering and releasing the document in respect of and extent of Ac.1.67 cents situated in Survey No.174/1 of Bandar East, Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary, etc., and for 2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondent No.2 in not receiving and refusing to register the document in respect of the subject matter land is contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and the petitioner, having left with no other remedy, is constrained to file the present writ petition. While drawing the attention of this Court to the communication dated 29.8.2023 of the Collector, Krishna at Machilipatnam to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Machilipatnam and the Tahsildar, Machilipatnam, he submits that as the petitioner came to know that the subject matter land was included in the list of prohibited properties, the petitioner made an application and pursuant to the same, the District Collector called for a report. He submits that as per his instructions, so far no further action is taken in the matter. He also submits that unless appropriate orders are issued, the petitioner would suffer serious prejudice and irreparable loss. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader sought to make detailed submissions with reference to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No.3. The purport of the counter affidavit appears to be that as the subject matter property is listed under the Prohibited category, the respondent No.2 does not have power to register any document in respect of the same. Be that as it may. 5. As it is not in dispute that the petitioner had already approached the competent Authority i.e., the District Collector for deletion of the subject matter land from the Prohibited Category list, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition providing that the District Collector, Krishna at Machilipatnam shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner, in the event the grievance of the petitioner with regard to inclusion of the subject matter property in the Prohibitory Category list has not been dealt with, so far. If any order has already been passed with reference to the application 3 made by the petitioner, the same shall be communicated under proper acknowledgement to the petitioner, so that the petitioner may work out his remedies, if the order is prejudicial to his interest/rights. 6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J Date: 08.12.2025. vasu