IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 9462 of 2008(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ BIJU PAUL, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.PAUL CHOOLAKKAL HOUSE, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURESHKUMAR SRI.LIFFY P. FRANCIS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ADMINISTRATOR, MATHA HOSPITAL THELLAKOM, KOTTAYAM-16. 2. SECRETARY & REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS ETTUMANOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH. 3. THE RDO, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE CHIEF REGISTRAR, BIRTHS & DEATHS PANCHAYATH DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP, SC FOR R2 SRI.C.J.JOY SRI.K.K.VIVEKANANDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C).No.9462/2008-B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2008 J U D G M E N T Sri.K.Gopalakrishna Kurup enters appearance for the second respondent. The learned Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4. The grievance which the petitioner voices in this writ petition is that the birth of his male child who was born on on 07/12/2003 in the first respondent's hospital has not been registered though intimation regarding the birth was promptly communicated to the second respondent by the hospital authorities. The petitioner relies on Ext.P5 to show that there was communication regarding the birth to the Panchayat and that there has been negligence on the side of the authorities, the second respondent, in registering the birth. The petitioner, apart from seeking a direction to the second respondent to issue birth certificate in the name of the child who has been named as Pavin Biju seeks a direction for payment of compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- by the respondents for the hardship and mental agony which has been caused to the petitioner. According to him, Ext.P5 by itself will show that the hospital authorities had communicated information regarding the child birth to the second respondent. As rightly pointed out by the W.P.(C).No.9462/2008-B 2 learned counsel for the second respondent, the petitioner will have to invoke the proviso under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, and get orders from the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the competent authority for getting birth duly registered. 2. I dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner to move the third respondent. According to the petitioner, he has already submitted Ext.P7 representation before the third respondent. The third respondent will consider Ext.P7 and if any application is required to be submitted in any prescribed format that application also, if the prescribed fee is remitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders at the earliest. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, Judge ms