Smt. Padisiri Manorama v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMAR WRI T PETI TI ON NO.11069 OF 2019

O R D E R

The prayer of the petitioner in this case reads as under: 'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus, to declare the in action of the respondents herein, not rectified the mistakes occurred in the registered document No: 10265/2001, dated: 19.12.2001, and also wrongly mentioned in its link document No: as 2651/1983, instead of mentioning & putting the document No: as 2650/1983, and another registered document No: 933/2002, and wrongly mentioned in its link document No: 2651/1983, instead of mentioning & putting the document No: as 2650/1983, and said documents were registered by the SRO, Hiyathnagar (Hyderabad East & Hyderabad Urban), i.e.

, 4th respondent office authority only, and same as been legal, arbitrary, unjust, and it's nothing but misuse of their official powers, and consequently direct the respondents herein, particularly 3rd respondent to 5th respondents herein, forthwith rectify the mistakes occurred in the registered document No: 10265/ 2001, dated: 19.12.2001, and wrongly mentioned in its link registered document No as 2651/1983, instead of mentioning & putting the document No: as 2650/1983, and another registered document No: 933/ 2002, dated: 16.02.2002, and wrongly mentioned in its link document No: 2651/1983 instead of mentioning & putting the document No: as 2650/1983, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.'

It may be noted that the document number was wrongly mentioned by the registration authorities as 2651 of 1983 instead of 2650

of 1983. The correction in relation to this wrong entry was made by them in the said document on the back of the first page. However, the petitioner now wants such corrections to be effected in the later documents which were registered as Document Nos.10265 of 2001 and 933 of 2002.

Significantly, this wrong document number was mentioned in the body of the Documents bearing Nos.10265 of 2001 and 933 of 2001. As the said documents were executed by the parties thereto, it would not be within the power of the registration authorities to make any changes therein and it would be for the parties themselves to execute rectification deeds, if they so choose. The prayer of the petitioner is therefore utterly misconceived.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 17th JUNE, 2019 Svv