APHC010889352018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 43043 OF 2018 Between: 1. Shaik Shafura Begum,, w/o Sk Abdul Rasheed, Muslim, Aged about 33 years, House Wife, D.No.17-390-2B-4-2, N.V.R. Street, Mothinagar, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of A P, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 3. The Tahsildar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District. 4. The SubRegistrar, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. ...Respondents 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 toto issue, a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not receiving the document presented by the petitioner and process for registration in respect of the Plot Nos.6, 7, 8 to an extent of 366.88 Square yards in S.No.76/2 of Basinikonda Village, Devathanagar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District on the ground that which is included in 2 VS,J W.P.No.43043 of 2018 the prohibited lands, without considering the Certificate vide proceedings Roc.E/26/2002 dated 31.10.2003 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, improper, unjust and contrary to law and violation of Section 22-A (1) of Registration Act and consequently direct the 4th respondent to receive the document presented by the petitioner and process for registration. IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 to direct the 4th respondent to receive document presented by the petitioner and process for registration in respect of the Plot Nos.6, 7, 8 to an extent of 366.88 Square yards in S.No.76/2 of Basinikonda Village, Devathanagar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following 3 VS,J W.P.No.43043 of 2018 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…. to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not receiving the document presented by the petitioner and process for registration in respect of the Plot Nos.6, 7, 8 to an extent of 366.88 Square yards in S.No.76/2 of Basinikonda Village, Devathanagar, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District on the ground that which is included in the prohibited lands, without considering the Certificate vide proceedings Roc.E/26/2002 dated 31.10.2003 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, improper unjust and contrary to law and violation of Section 22-A(1) of Registration Act and consequently direct the 4th respondent to receive the document presented by the petitioner and process for registration.….” 2. Brief facts of the case are as follows: a) Initially, an extent of Ac.1.46 cents in Sy.No.93/1 and Ac.1.70 cents in Sy.No.76/2 of Basinikonda Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, were assigned to one Seethamma on 31.07.2003, as she was the wife of a political sufferer. After death of her husband, she executed a registered sale deed dated 18.06.2004 in favour of one Neerugatti Venkatramana for valid sale consideration and delivered possession of the said land to him. Thereafter, the said Neerugatti Venkatramana executed a registered sale deed dated 03.09.2016 in favour of the petitioner for a valid sale consideration and delivered possession of an extent of 366.88 square yards and since then, the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. 4 VS,J W.P.No.43043 of 2018 b) When the petitioner intended to alienate the subject property for her legal necessities and entered into an agreement of sale with one C.Sanjay Kumar after receiving an advance towards the sale consideration, she approached the 4th respondent for determination of the market value of the subject property. However, the 4th respondent furnished the list of prohibited properties along with G.O.Ms.No.215, dated 13.05.2016, which does not include the subject land. c) It is an admitted fact that G.O.Ms.No.215, dated 13.05.2016 issued by the 4th respondent, the subject survey number is not included in the list of prohibited properties notified under Section 22-A of the Registration Act. In such a case, this Court is of the opinion that the registering authority cannot refuse to receive and register the document presented by the petitioner on the sole ground that in the online entries, the market value of the subject survey number is shown as ‘0’ (zero). Challenging the action the 4th respondent in not receiving the document presented by the petitioner and processing the same for registration in respect of the subject property, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 4. Though the 4th respondent contended that the subject property is shown in the prohibitory list and, therefore, the document cannot be received and registered in respect of the subject property, there is nothing on record to 5 VS,J W.P.No.43043 of 2018 show that the 4th respondent has passed any order of refusal recording the reasons for such refusal, as required under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short, ‘the Act’). 5. In this regard, it is relevant to refer to Section 71 of the Act, which reads as follows: 71. 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 situated within his sub-district, shall make an order of refusal and record the 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. 6. In view of the above, respondent No.4 is directed to receive and process the document(s), as and when presented by the petitioner for registration, in accordance with the provisions of Section 71 of the Act. If the document cannot be registered, the respondents shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908, so as to enable the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 72 of the said Act. 6 VS,J W.P.No.43043 of 2018 7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 05.08.2026 KGR