SCA/4057/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4057 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= PATEL NAYANABEN GHANSHYAMBHAI - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR GD ACHARYA for Petitioner MR VINAY PANDYA, ASSTT.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondents ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH Date : 16/04/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr.G.D. Acharya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Pandya, learned AGP for the respondents. Leave to correct the date in prayer clause [A] of paragaph-6 of the petition SCA/4057/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT from 28th June, 1962 to 28th August, 1962. 2. Rule. Mr. Vinay Pandya waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. When this petition was listed on 4th March, 2008, notice for final disposal was issued and the same is served upon the respondents. 3. The petitioner has prayed for appropriate writ, order or direction in exercise of powers vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to the respondents directing them to correct the name of the petitioner from “Anandi” to “Nayanaben” in birth register maintained by the respondent authority and the date of birth of the petitioner from “28.8.1962” to “10.6.1962” in the register maintained under the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969. From the documents produced along with the petition, it appears that date of birth of the petitioner is clearly stated to be 10th June, 1962. Therefore, it is highly probable that from the strength of the information given, birth date of the petitioner was registered. Mr. Acharya has submitted that the observations made by this Court [Coram:K.S. Jhaveri, J.] in the judgment rendered in the case of Arunkumar Mohanbhai Patel Vs. Talati cum Mantri, in Special Civil Application No. 12822 of 2004 dated 8.10.2004 may be taken into consideration. It is therefore urged that the name “Anandi” reflected in the birth certificate can be corrected by the respondents by placing correct SCA/4057/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT name of the petitioner as “Nayanaben”. Similarly, the date of birth of the petitioner may also be corrected from 28.8.1962 to 10.6.1962. 4. There is no formal resistance from the learned AGP and considering the fact situation as has been explained by the petitioner satisfactorily, the Court is inclined to accept the say of Mr. Acharya, especially in view of the suggestion made by this Court in the above cited decision. 5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner now shall approach the respondent no.2 with necessary documents such as copies of School Leaving Certificate, passport, PAN Cart etc. and request the authority to correct the entry and the respondent no.2 shall correct the the entry by placing correct name of the petitioner from “Anandi” to “Nayanaben” in the register of birth. Similarly, the date of birth of the petitioner shall also be corrected from 28.8.1962 to 10.6.1962. After correcting both the entries, fresh birth certificate, if is prayed for, shall be issued to the petitioner on payment of requisite fees. 6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs. [C.K. BUCH, J.] pirzada/-