IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2010 / 16TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 36303 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ROJO JOSEPH, ADVOCATE, THURUTHIPARA HOUSE, KANNAMBRA, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, CORPORATION OF KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE CHIEF REGISTRAR, FOR REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.36303 OF 2009 (G) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3, a communication issued by the first respondent. Petitioner's son was born on 23rd April, 2004 in the PVS Hospital, Kozhikode. Birth was reported to the first respondent and in the birth certificate dated 12th April, 2006 the name of the child was mentioned as “Joy T.R. “ According to the petitioner, there was a mistake in the name so entered and the correct name which ought to have been entered is “Joseph Rojo”. 3. Realizing the above, petitioner submitted Ext.P1 request to the first respondent requesting for entering the name of his son as “Joseph Rojo”. Along with Ext.P1, a copy of the birth certificate, Ext.P2 in this writ petition, was also enclosed. However, by Ext.P3, the request made by the petitioner was rejected, on the ground that there is no provision enabling correction of the name once entered in the birth and death register. Reliance is also placed on the circular dated 20.3.2007, WPC.No. 36303/09 :2 : issued by the Chief Registrar of Birth and Deaths. It is challenging Ext.P3 that this writ petition is filed. 4. Counsel for the petitioner place reliance on the judgments of this court in Girijan V. Registrar of Births & Deaths(2003(2) KLT 22), Meena V. Corporation of Cochin (2004(2)KLT 1118) and Varghese V. Director of Panchayat (2008(2) KLT 278) to substantiate his contention. On the other hand Standing Counsel for the first respondent submits that in all the cases dealt with by this court, only correction was sought for unlike in this case where total change of name is applied for. 5. However, pleadings in the writ petition show that the correct name of the petitioner's son is “Joseph Rojo” and “Joy T.R” is the name entered in the register of the first respondent. If that be so, the request of the petitioner has to be treated as one for correction of a mistake and the authorities are always having the power to correct such mistake which has been recognized in the judgments relied on by the counsel for the petitioner. Therefore I quash Ext.P3 and direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 request in accordance with law and in the light of WPC.No. 36303/09 :3 : the judgments referred to above. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of production of a coy of the judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/