SCA/3019/2008 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3019 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 ? ========================================================= SHANTIBEN BHULABHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s) Versus MAMLATDAR & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR BALRAM D JAIN for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR VINAY PANDYA, LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondents. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH Date : 07/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard Shri Balram D. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Vinay S. Pandya, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. SCA/3019/2008 2/5 JUDGMENT 2. Rule. The formal service of notice of Rule is waived by Shri Vinay S. Pandya, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on behalf of the respondents. The Rule is fixed forthwith on consent. 3. The petitioner by way of this petition has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction in terms of relief Clause-B of paragraph no.22 of the petition. The reliefs prayed for in Clauses A, C and D are found to be ancillary reliefs. The said relief Clause-B reads as under : “B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or certiorari or a writ in the nature of mandamus or certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dtd.7.2.2008 passed by the res.no.1 in Application No.12.10.2007;” 4. According to Shri Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in a number of SCA/3019/2008 3/5 JUDGMENT similar type of petitions, orders have been passed by this Court allowing such petitions. There is as such no change in the date of birth of the petitioner registered in the relevant document. It is submitted that the petitioner was never named as either Diwali or alias Pali. She is named and known as 'Shantiben'. The competent authority namely the Passport Authority has issued passport in the very name i.e. Shantiben Bhulabhai. In earlier years, the births were being registered in the Village Form No.14 and the person who had gone to get the birth of the present petitioner registered had committed the mistake. The name of the father as well as the grandfather is also not mentioned correctly before the authority. The full name of father of the petitioner is 'Lallubhai Bhagabhai', even then the same has been registered as 'Lallu Bhaga' in the relevant register. The petitioner at present is married and the name of her husband is reflected in the passport. The name of the father of the SCA/3019/2008 4/5 JUDGMENT petitioner is also reflected in the passport as 'Lallubhai Bhagabhai'. When the facts contended in the petition are supported by affidavit and also with the other genuine documentary evidence, the present petition is required to be allowed. 5. This Court (Coram : C.K. Buch, J) in one such similar case while dealing with Special Civil Application No.511 of 2008 decided on 01st February 2008 has allowed the petition. So having considered the reasons assigned in the said petition, the present petition can also be allowed in the interest of justice without entering into further discussion. 6. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is hereby allowed. The respondents, mainly the respondent no.1, are hereby directed to correct the name of the petitioner in the relevant Birth Register (Village Form No.14) and mention the name of the petitioner as 'Shantiben' and in the same way, the names of SCA/3019/2008 5/5 JUDGMENT father and grandfather of the petitioner in the said Birth Register be changed as 'Lallubhai' and 'Bhagabhai' respectively instead of 'Lallu' and 'Bhaga'. Necessary correction be made at the earliest, preferably within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of writ of this order. 7. After correcting the said entries, fresh birth certificate, if is prayed for, shall be issued to the petitioner on her payment of requisite fees. Order and direction accordingly. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. Direct Service is permitted. (C.K. Buch, J) Aakar