her favour. The said land was made to sub-division through the proceedings of the third respondent and computerized patta was issued to her. While issuing computerized patta in Patta No.464, the respondent entered her name alone in the patta perfectly. But they committed an error while making entry in Patta No.9 with regard to the land in S.No. 52/5B. Since, the name of one Muniyandi was included along with her name. The said Muniyandi has no nexus with her property. Immediately, the petitioner has given a petition before the third respondent for rectifying the error, but it was rejected without any explanation. Aggrieved over the same, she preferred an appeal before the second respondent and the second respondent issued a communication on 31.03.2022 to the office of the third respondent for the purpose of filing enquiry report and thereafter, she was informed that the mistake crept in was done at the time of UDR. Immediately, the petitioner has sent representation dated 05.09.2022 to the respondents in order to rectify the defect in Patta No.9 which was done at the time of UDR. Even after receiving her representation, the respondents did not take any steps for rectifying the defects.
