IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 8523 of 2009(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- THEJU THOMAS.P.,D/O.THOMAS, AGED 20 YEARS,PARAKKAL HOUSE, KARIPPAL P.O.,THIMIRI AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI SRI.V.A.SATHEESH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS, TALIPARAMBA MUNICIPALITY, TALIPARAMBA P.O.,KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SECRETARY,TALIPARAMBA MUNICIPALITY, TALIPARAMBA P.O.,KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. THE CHIEF REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH, SC FOR CORPN. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.8523/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC NO.20275/2008 DT 7.7.2008 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT INWPC NO.27144/2008 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT 10.2.2009 SUBMITTED BEFORE the 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE STAMPED APPLICATION DT 10.2.2009 ADDRESSING THE 3RDR ESPONDENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH EXT.P4 APPLICATION. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DT 9.2.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH EXT.P4. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE SSLC OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PARENTS OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTIFICATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BIRTH AND DEATH REGISTRAR OF ERAMAM KUTTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF the CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BIRTH AND DEATH REGISTRAR OF ERAMAM KUTTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT HOMEO MEDICAL OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P13: TRUECOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GOVT. VETERINARY SURGEON TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF IDENTITY ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VELLORA. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE OURDE HOSPITAL, TALIPARAMBA. WPC NO.8523/2009 -2- EXT.P16: TRUE COPY OF THE HIGHER SECONDARY EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P17: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT 20.3.2007. EXT.P18: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P19: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P20: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11/3/09 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 8523 OF 2009 (I) ===================== Dated this the 4th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P20 whereby an application made by the petitioner for correction of her name was rejected. It is stated that though the petitioner's name is as shown in the cause title of this writ petition, her name was wrongly entered in the registers maintained by the 1st respondent as Thresia. It is stated that though an application for correction was made, that was rejected by Ext.P20. The reasoning stated in Ext.P20 is that on an earlier occasion, the petitioner's parents had applied and got their names corrected. It is stated that even on that occasion, the mistake in the name of the petitioner was not pointed out. 2. It may be true that on an earlier occasion, omission has happened, but that does not mean that the name of the petitioner as entered is not wrong. If there is a mistake in the name entered in the register, it is always open to the petitioner to seek its correction and the respondent is also bound to consider the same. Therefore, ignoring the fact that it was not brought to their notice WPC 8523/09 :2 : on an earlier occasion, request of the petitioner shall be considered on merits. Therefore, quashing Ext.P20, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the application made by the petitioner for correction of her name. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp