LAWS(APH)-2012-4-33

KOTHAPALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Decided On April 19, 2012
KOTHAPALLI GRAM PANCHAYAT Appellant
V/S
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Gram Panchayat located in the neighbourhood of Proddatur Town, Kadapa District. It consists of Kothapalli, Modameedipalle, Surveyreddypalle villages. On finding that the lands within the area of operation of the Gram Panchayat are being purchased in the shape of plots from unauthorised lay outs, the Sarpanch and the Secretary of the Gram Panchaayut have approached the Joint Sub-Registrar-I and the Sub-Registrar, Proddatur, respondents 4 and 5 herein, with a request not to entertain the sale deeds pertaining to the lands in the Gram Panchayat. They have also made a written representation dated 20.12.2010. The 4th respondent in turn informed the petitioners, through letter, dated 24.12.2010, that there is no prohibition against the registration of documents in relation to the plots in unauthorised or unapproved lay outs and instead, they can make efforts to get the properties under the purview of Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner prays for a direction to the 1st respondent to issue a notification, in respect of the lands in the limits of Gram Panchayat, prohibiting the registration of documents in relation thereto. The petitioner contends that Section 22-A of the Act has been enacted only with a view to prevent registration of documents pertaining to unauthorised transfers and that prayer made by them squarely fits into that provision. It is also urged that the indiscriminate sale of plots in the unauthorised and unapproved lay outs is adversely effecting the revenue of the Gram Panchayat as well as composition and structure.

(2.) A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5. They submit that the Act, as it stands now, does not clothe them with the right to register the document and that the petitioner can take necessary steps to prevent any unauthorised constructions.

(3.) Heard Sri K.Subrahmanya Narusu, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.