APHC010058112026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 3335/2026 Between: 1. GUMMADI RATNA RAJU,, S/O LATE YESOBU VELAGAPUDI (V), THULLUR (M), GUNTUR DIST., AMARAVATI - 522241 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE, REGISTRATIONS AND STAMPS DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI - 522241 2. THE SUBREGISTRAR, MANDADAM SUB-REGISTRATION OFFICE, REGISTRATION AND STAMPS DEPARTMENT MANDADAM, AMARAVATI - 522241 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus (or) any appropriate Writ, directing the Respondent No.2 to deal with the representation Dt. 12.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner before him, in accordance with the law enunciated under the Registration Act and its Rules therein and the precedents of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and this Hon'ble High Court and consequently for directing the Respondent No.2 to register any instruments, present by the Petitioner 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondent No.2, to adhere the precedents of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and this Hon’ble Court while dealing with the Representation dt., 12.01.2026 filed by the Petitioner before him pending disposal of instant W.P. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATA RANJIT KUMAR BEEDA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS 3 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 2nd respondent in not disposing of the representation dated 12.01.2026 in accordance with law enunciated under the Registration Act and its Rules therein and the precedents of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and this Hon’ble High Court and consequently seeking direction to the 2nd respondent to register any instruments presented by the petitioner. 3. The learned Senior Counsel also refers to the decision rendered by the erstwhile High Court in Dr. Yadla Ramesh Naidu v. Sub- Registrar, Sabbavaram, Visakhapatnam District and others 1 wherein at para 27 of the said judgment it was held that the respondent No.1-Sub-Registrar, was not justified in refusing to receive and register the documents presented by the petitioner on the ground that there were objections taken by the unofficial respondents with respect to registering of the documents in question. At para 25 of the said judgment it was observed that, in that view of the matter, it has to be held that the registering authority under the Registration Act, is not entitled to go into title disputes. 1 2009 (1) ALD 337 4 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader relying upon the counter of the 2nd respondent submits that the Registering Officer is not adjudicating the title. However, as a part of the statutory duty and in accordance with the departmental instructions issued by the Government and the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, A.P. Tadepalli, the Registering Officer is required to verify the identity of the property, survey particulars, nature and classification of land whether the property falls under any prohibited category. When any doubt arises regarding the survey number, extent, classification, government interest, assigned land, endowment land or any other restricted category, the Registering Officer is required to verify the records and seek clarification which does not amount to the adjudication of title. The representation of the petitioner will be examined in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioner’s representation dated 12.01.2026 along with the presentation of the document shall be considered strictly in accordance with law under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908. The said exercise shall be conducted within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. 5 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 10.03.2026 NNN