Judgment This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to renew the petitioner's Driving Licence No.TN74 19940001464 periodically without making any alteration or correction in the existing licence. 2. The petitioner applied for driving licence for Light Motor Vehicle with the second respondent on 29.03.1994. The petitioner was issued with driving licence bearing licence No. TN74 19940001464 and subsequently, he was authorised by the competent authorities to drive Transport Vehicle vide Badge No.25275, dated 19.04.2004. The petitioner's licence was renewed periodically without any hindrance. The petitioner enrolled his name in the District Employment Exchange, Kanyakumari District, for his employment. The petitioner was recruited to the post of Driver-cum-Conductor through District Employment Exchange in the State Express Transport Corporation Tamil Nadu Ltd., on 24.03.2008 and sent for training on 09.04.2008. After completion of training, he was appointed as Driver-cum-Conductor on 02.07.2008. At present, he is working as Driver in Trichirappalli State Express Transport Corporation from 08.12.2008 onwards. 3. In the year 2006, the petitioner applied for renewal of driving licence. The second respondent returned the application for renewal with an endorsement that a Data Entry Error is occurred in granting his driving licence and further stated that in the petitioner's driving licence, one Mr.M.Maheen Abubakkar's data is entered, who was subsequently applied for driving licence with the second respondent on 05.04.1994 and therefore, the second respondent directed the petitioner to produce the original driving licence. The petitioner produced the same with connected records. The second respondent after scrutinizing the driving licence and connected records, renewed the petitioner's driving licence on 18.04.2006 upto 18.04.2009. 4. In October 2008, the petitioner received a copy of memo addressed to M.Maheen Abubakkar. In the said memo issued to the said M.Maheen Abubakkar stated that his details were wrongly entered in the driving licence issued to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to approach the second respondent. Immediately, the petitioner approached the second respondent and explained in detail. The petitioner did not receive any further communication from the second respondent. 5. While so, in the second week of April 2009, the petitioner approached the second respondent for renewal of his licence. The second respondent refused the same and informed that a mistake was committed by their office and decided to issue a driving licence with new number. 6. The petitioner did not receive any further communication from the second respondent. 5. While so, in the second week of April 2009, the petitioner approached the second respondent for renewal of his licence. The second respondent refused the same and informed that a mistake was committed by their office and decided to issue a driving licence with new number. 6. The petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to renew his Driving Licence No.TN74 19940001464 periodically without making any alteration or correction in the existing licence on the ground that the same has been entered in his service record and if any change in the number, it will affect him adversely. 7. Though the writ petition is of the year 2009, the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit so far. 8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 9. The petitioner's claim that his driving licence must be renewed without alteration or correction, is well founded, as his details have been entered in his service record. The petitioner is entitled to the relief sought for in the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondents 1 and 2 to renew the petitioner's Driving Licence No.TN74 19940001464 without making any alteration or correction in the existing Licence, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.