8 HH 29-2007 HC 1786/06 in the heads of argument filed on behalf of the applicant that the Minister is politically intent upon frustrating the registration of the applicant as a mass media provider. No evidence has been placed before this court to substantiate such argument as to political motivation. I turn now to the nature of the relief being sought by the applicant. In terms of the draft order attached to its application, the applicant sought an order in the following terms: IT IS ORDERED THAT:1. Applicant is deemed to be registered as a mass media service in terms of section 66 of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act [Chapter 10:27]. 2. First respondent is ordered to issue to Applicant a certificate of registration as a mass media service in terms of section 66 of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act [Chapter 10:27] 3. First respondent shall pay the costs of this application. According to the applicant there is nothing in the Administrative Justice Act [Chapter 10:28] (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which prevents this court from declaring that the applicant is deemed to have been duly registered in terms of AIPPA. The applicant however goes on to further contend that in terms of common law this court can issue a mandatory interdict directing the first respondent to register the applicant in terms of section 69 of AIPPA. In support of its application the applicant has referred to several authorities, both from this jurisdiction and from beyond our borders viz :- Traube v Administrator4; West Rand Bantu Affairs Administration Board v Jacques;5 Honnievale Wine and Brandy Co v Gordonia Liquor Licensing Board6. Within this jurisdiction I have been referred to the following authorities:-Director of Civil Aviation v Hall7, Enhanced Communications Network (Pvt) Ltd v The Minister of Information and Ors 8, and Affretair (Pvt) Ltd and Anor v MK Airlines (Pvt) Ltd9. The argument is made on behalf of the applicant that taking into account the provisions of the Act there is no bar to my making an order that the applicant be deemed to be registered based on the case of Traube v Administrator, Transvaal & Ors (supra). Whilst the Act does provide for relief against an administrative authority which has not acted in accordance with its statutory duty, it does not exclude an applicant from seeking other appropriate relief from such administrative authority. 4 1989 (2) SA 396 1976 (4) SA 903 6 1953 (3) SA 500 7 1990 (2) ZLR 354 8 HH 205/1997 9 1996 (2) ZLR 15 5 8