Judgment : 1. Heard Mr.B.Jameel Arasu, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr.K.Guru, the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Respondents 1 and 2 are to conduct an enquiry, in terms of Circular No.67, dated 03.11.2011 (C.No.52338/C1/2011) issued by the Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, on the basis of his representation, dated 30.07.2014. 3. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner urges before this Court that the Petitioner addressed a communication, dated 04.04.2014 to the Inspector General of Registration, Head Office at Pattinam Pakkam, Chennai – 28, whereby and where under, he has sought for cancellation of forged sale deed, which was registered and also to take criminal action against the concerned persons. The said representation of the Petitioner till date has not met with a positive response from the Inspector General of Registration. That apart, the Petitioner also addressed another letter dated 30.07.2014, to the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai – 28, on the subject of creation of forged documents and subsequently, the same being registered, for taking necessary action against the concerned persons. The second representation of the Petitioner, dated 30.07.2014 has not seen the result till date. As such, the Petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing the present Writ of Mandamus. 4. At this stage, this Court has looked into the contents of Circular No.67, dated 03.11.2011 (C.No.52338/C1/2011) issued by the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai-28, on the Subject – 'procedure – complaints relating to fraudulent registrations through impersonation or production of false documents and evidences'. It transpires from the said contents of the Circular that certain instructions have been issued to the Authorities concerned like Deputy Inspector General of Registration, All District Registrars, all Sub Registrars, etc., and the procedures prescribed in the Circular has been mentioned to the effect that the same is only to deal with fraudulent registration done etc. 5. It transpires from the said contents of the Circular that certain instructions have been issued to the Authorities concerned like Deputy Inspector General of Registration, All District Registrars, all Sub Registrars, etc., and the procedures prescribed in the Circular has been mentioned to the effect that the same is only to deal with fraudulent registration done etc. 5. In view of the fact that the prayer of the Writ Petitioner in the present Writ of Mandamus is only limited nature viz., for passing of an order by this Court in directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to conduct an enquiry pursuant to the Circular No.67, on the basis of the Petitioner's representation dated 30.07.2014, this Court, in the Interest of Justice, Fair Play and even as Equitable Relief, directs the District Registrar, District Registrar's Office, Dindigul, to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 30.07.2014, on merits, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, of course, after providing enough opportunity to the Petitioner and others concerned by adhering to the principles of the natural justice. The first Respondent is directed to pass an order on the basis of the representation of the Petitioner, dated 30.07.2014 in a dispassionate manner, uninfluenced with any of the observation made by this Court in the present Writ Petition. Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to produce photo copies / xerox copies of documents, which he relies upon to substantiate his version, as projected in his representation, state supra. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.