IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC SATURDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2010 / 10TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 21638 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- NIDHIN A. UNNITHAN,(MINOR),AGED 18, S/O.K.G.AJITH KUMAR, PERUMPALIL HOUSE, PERINGALA P.O, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, REP. BY HIS FATHER K.G.AJITH KUMAR, R/A PERUMPALIL HOUSE, PERINGALA.P.O, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.VINCENT JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, OACHIRA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OACHIRA. 2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.B.HARISH KUMAR FOR R1 GP SRI.V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 21638 of 2008 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 12.3.08 ISSUED BY THE HOLY MARY CENTRAL SCHOOL SENIOR SECONDARY EXT.P1(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION DELHI TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S PARENTS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23.4.08 EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.4.08 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER'S FATHER EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S PARENTS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 20.5.08 EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER FROM 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24.6.08 (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.21638 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated, this the 30th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. The prayer sought in this writ petition is to quash Exts.P3 and P5. 2. Petitioner submits that his correct name is Nidhin A. Unnithan. According to him, by a mistake, his name was wrongly entered as N.A. Sreejith Unnithan, in the register maintained by the 1st respondent who is also the Registrar. An application was made for correction and that was declined by Ext.P3 of the 1st respondent and which was affirmed by Ext.P5 of the 2nd respondent. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed challenging the aforesaid orders. 3. This Court in Varghese v. Director of Panchayat (2008 (2) KLT 278) has held that it is well within the power of the Registrar to make the correction of mistakes. Although the request of the petitioner involves a change in the name entered in the register, still W.P.(C).21638/08 2 on facts, it is evident that it is on account of an obvious mistake, the name was wrongly entered in the register. If that be so, it is well within the power of the 1st respondent to correct the mistake. Therefore, the view taken in Exts.P3 and P5 cannot accepted. 3. Accordingly Exts.P3 and P5 are set aside and the 1st respondent is directed to pass fresh orders in the light of the above observations, on the application made by the petitioner. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mrcs