IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN WRIT PETITION No.23102 of 2010 Between: Mugada Suresh Kumar. … Petitioner And The Deputy Transport Commissioner, RTA Office, Transport Authority, NFCL Road, Kakinada, East Godavari District and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri H.Yogesh Kumar. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Transport for R.1. Sri K.Satyanarayana Murty for R.2. This Court made the following: ORDER:- The mistake in describing the name of the petitioner’s father in the driving licence appeared to have cost him the employment with respondent No.2. Be that as it may, the limited grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that in the driving licence issued to him by respondent No.1 on 6-10-2003, the name of his father was shown as M.R.Rao instead of M.Ganga Raju @ M.G.Rao; and his application, made to respondent No.1 for correction of the said mistake, having been turned down, he filed the present Writ Petition. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2 it is, inter alia, stated that the petitioner has applied for the post of contract driver and when the screening committee examined his original certificates, it was observed in the driving licence his father’s name was shown as M.R.Rao, whereas in the Caste and Nativity Certificates produced by him, the name was shown as Mugada Ganga Raju and in the Transfer Certificate it was shown as Mugada Gangadhara Raju. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.1 it is stated that the petitioner’s application could not be considered as there is no provision under the Motor Vehicles Act,1988 and the Rules made thereunder for change of the name of the father. In my opinion, absence of a provision should not deter respondent No.1 from carrying out the correction in the driving licence if he is satisfied that a mistake has occurred in mentioning the name of the petitioner’s father or giving any details on any other aspect. If for any reason no provision is envisaged for correction of such mistakes, they cannot be allowed to be perpetuated causing sufferance to the person concerned on account of such mistakes. Even in the absence of a provision, the power to correct the entries in the driving licence shall be recognized to exist as incidental or ancillary powers of the authority issuing driving licence to make appropriate corrections. Otherwise, manifest injustice will be caused to the victim. In this view of the matter, respondent No.1 is directed to issue a notice to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order calling upon him to produce the relevant material to support his plea that his father’s name was wrongly entered in his driving licence. If respondent No.1 is satisfied with reference to the material that was placed by the petitioner, he shall carryout the corrections in the driving licence and issue a fresh driving licence to the petitioner within two weeks of the petitioner making a representation. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, WPMP No.29479 of 2010 is disposed of as infructuous. ------------------------------------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:20-9-2011 MNR