IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 25269 of 2011(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- BINO KUMAR.R., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.LATE RAVINDHRAN.K., RAVI NIVAS, PUTHUKKUNDAM MURI, KARTHIKAPPALLY.P.O, KARTHIKAPPALLY VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.PIN-690 516. BY ADVS. SRI.G.BENO, SMT.C.CHYTHANYA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CHIEF REGISTRAR (BIRTH AND DEATH), DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (BIRTH AND DEATH), OFFICE OF THE PANCHAYATH DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CIVIL STATION ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. 688 001. 3. THE SECRETARY/REGISTRAR, CHINGOLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHINGOLI.P.O., KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 532. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. P. MAYA, R3 BY ADVS. SRI.B.PRAMOD, SRI.V.S.KARTHIKEYAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.25269/2010-G: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE SSL CERTIFICATE OF 2005. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ENGINEERING CERTIFICATE. EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF ELECTION COMMISSION ID CARD. EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE RATION CARD. EXT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE DISPUTED BIRTH CERTIFICATE. EXT.P6. TRUE COPY OF THE ONE AND SAME CERTIFICATE. EXT.P7. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER A6-4081(A) DATED 12-08-2011 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P8. TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.5-09-2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Prv. HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.2526 9 OF 2011 ------------------------- DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P7 and for a direction directing the 3rd respondent to issue birth certificate to the petitioner after effecting correction in the name of the petitioner 'Bino' as 'Bino Kumar. R' in the birth register. 2. Petitioner submitted an application before the 3rd respondent for correction of his name in the birth register as 'Bino Kumar. R.' instead of 'Bino'. The application was rejected by the 3rd respondent by Ext.P7 order stating that correction of name is not possible due to the existence of the Circular No.B1-20741/2009 dated 8/12/2010. 3. Petitioner is a graduate in Mechanical Engineering. His name is Bino Kumar. R as per SSLCertificate, degree certificate, Election Commission of India identity card and ration card. Copies of the documents mentioned above are marked as Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P4 -2- W.P.(C).No.25269/2011 respectively. It is stated that the petitioner applied for passport and at the time of verification of the certificates, the officials of the passport office noticed that the name of the petitioner is written as 'Bino' in the birth certificate and therefore the application was returned. Ext.P5 is the copy of the birth certificate. Ext.P6 is the certificate issued by the Tahsildar certifying that the person bearing name Bino Kumar.R and Bino is one and the same person. After getting Ext.P7 communication from the 3rd respondent, petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation before the 2nd respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 allows the Registrar to correct the wrong entries made in the birth register. The lst respondent has the authority to correct an improper entry made in the birth register and corresponding entry in the birth certificate. 5. This Court had occasion to consider similar question in the case reported in Shipna Jose v. Registrar (2010 (2) KLT -3- W.P.(C).No.25269/2011 978). This Court considered similar questions and held that Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 allows correction or cancellation of entry in the Register of Births and Deaths, that the legal position has now been laid down in the later decision by the Division Bench of this Court reported in Chalakudy Municipality v. Malavika (2009 (4) KLT 714). The Division Bench after considering various aspects laid down the law which reads as follows: “The law does not contemplate a person to have a wrong name in the register or a mistaken identity in the register or to have wrong particulars regarding the date, place etc. in the register of birth or death. It is also to be noted that the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 does not create or extinguish any right; the Act is intended only to regulate the process and procedures of registration of births and deaths and the correction of any such entry. Once the Act permits such correction either in form or substance, the Rules are intended only to regulate the procedure and not to prohibit such correction.” 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ext.P7 is set aside. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P8 -4- W.P.(C).No.25269/2011 representation on merits and allow the correction on being satisfied that it requires such a correction. The petitioner shall comply with the formalities required for submission of the application. The order shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment on condition that the petitioner complies with the formalities required for submission of the application. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.