Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a refusal check slip issued by the Sub-Registrar, Vaniyambadi, Tirupattur District, which refused to register a sale deed dated 27.01.2025 executed in favour of the petitioner. The refusal was on the ground that the property was an unapproved plot not regularized under the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017. The petitioner contended that an earlier sale deed for a part of the same survey number had been registered in 2020, and thus the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908, read with a Division Bench order dated 15.06.2017, compelled registration. The facts revealed that the vendor had earlier sold small portions from the same survey number (3 cents each) in 2020, and those sale deeds were registered as Doc. Nos. 7814 and 7815 of 2020. However, a subsequent audit by the District Registrar, Vellore, revealed that those registrations were in gross violation of Section 22A of the Registration Act because they concerned unapproved layout plots. The Sub-Registrar who registered those deeds was issued a charge memo under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, and disciplinary proceedings were pending. The core legal issue was whether the refusal check slip was valid in light of the 2017 Rules and the Division Bench's order of 15.06.2017, which clarified that plots registered as house sites before 21.10.2016 shall be registered, but thereafter unapproved plots cannot be registered. The petitioner argued that since a previous registration had occurred in 2020, the proviso and the clarification should cover the case, and that the land was agricultural. The respondents argued that the prior registrations were illegal and under disciplinary scrutiny, the plot was unapproved, and registration would directly violate Section 22A and Rule 15(b). The court, per Justice N. Anand Venkatesh, examined the Division Bench order dated 15.06.2017 and held that the proviso to Section 22A(2) applies only to plots registered as house sites prior to 21.10.2016. The plot in question was sold as agricultural but intended for conversion into house sites; permitting such small parcels to be sold without approval would allow developers to circumvent the 2017 Rules. Moreover, the pendency of disciplinary proceedings against the erring Sub-Registrar weighed heavily, as directing registration would undermine those proceedings and sanctify the earlier illegal act. The court also referred to its own earlier order in W.P.No.3733 of 2025 where a similar attempt was rejected. Consequently, the court disposed of the writ petition, declining to interfere with the refusal check slip. The petitioner was left at liberty to purchase the property after obtaining proper approval under the 2017 Rules. No costs were ordered.
Headnote
A) Registration Law - Unapproved Plots - Prohibition of registration of unapproved layouts/plots - Registration Act, 1908, Section 22A; Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017, Rule 15(b) - The Sub-Registrar refused to register a sale deed for an unapproved plot; the court found that Section 22A read with Rule 15(b) imposes a clear bar on registration of unapproved plots unless regularized, and the cut-off date for existing house sites is 21.10.2016 - Held, the refusal check slip was not illegal and was upheld (Paras 2, 5, 10). B) Registration Law - Proviso to Section 22A(2) - Scope of proviso - Registration Act, 1908, Section 22A, proviso to sub-section (2) - The petitioner argued that an earlier sale deed for a similar plot was registered in 2020, thus bringing the case within the proviso; the court clarified that the proviso applies only to plots registered as house sites prior to 21.10.2016, and a registration in 2020, even if irregular, does not trigger the proviso - Held, the proviso was inapplicable (Paras 2, 4-5). C) Property Law - Agricultural Land Sales - Circumvention of layout regularization - Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017 - The vendor sold small parcels (2-4 cents) of land described as agricultural, but the court found that the real intention was to convert them into house sites without obtaining approval; permitting such sales would amount to overreaching the Division Bench order dated 15.06.2017 - Held, the refusal justified to prevent misuse (Para 8). D) Administrative Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Relevance of pending disciplinary action - Tamil Nadu Civil Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, Rule 17(b) - The earlier registration in 2020 was found to be in gross violation and the concerned Sub-Registrar faced disciplinary proceedings; the court reasoned that directing registration of the present deed would water down those proceedings and sanctify the irregular act - Held, this provided an additional ground to dismiss the writ petition (Paras 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned refusal check slip dated 28.01.2025 issued by the Sub-Registrar, Vaniyambadi, refusing to register the sale deed dated 27.01.2025 executed in favour of the petitioner, was valid under Section 22A of the Registration Act, 1908 read with Rule 15(b) of the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017, particularly in light of an earlier registration of a similar sale deed in 2020.
Final Decision
The writ petition was disposed of; the impugned refusal check slip dated 28.01.2025 was not interfered with; the petitioner was at liberty to purchase the property after obtaining proper approval under the 2017 Rules.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Unapproved plots cannot be registered under Registration Act
- 1908 read with Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules
- 2017
- the proviso to Section 22A(2) applies only to plots registered as house sites prior to 21.10.2016
- a prior illegal registration does not estop authorities from refusing registration of a subsequent deed
- agricultural land sold in small parcels intended for conversion to house sites without approval is not permissible
- disciplinary proceedings against a registering officer for violating Section 22A provide additional justification for refusal to register.
