IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2009 / 12TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37061 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ALEYAMMA KURIAN ALIAS THANKAMMA VARGHESE, W/O.K.S.KURIAN KUZHIPULATH, THURUTHICAD, KALLOOPARA, THIRUVALLA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND BEATHS, THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY, THIRUVALLA. 2. THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY SECRETARY, THIRUVALLA. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SHRI.SUBASH CHAND, FOR R1 & R2 G.P. SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.37061 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the mother of Jyoti.K.Kurian. The birth of Jyoti.K.Kurian has been registered with the 1st respondent Registrar of Births and Deaths, Thiruvalla. Although the petitioner's name is Aleyamma Kurian, she is also known as Thankamma Varghese. In all the official records the petitioner's name is shown as Aleyamma Kurian. While registering the birth of her daughter the name of the petitioner was entered in the birth register as “Thankamma Varghese”. The petitioner has now filed an application before the 1st respondent for correction of her name in the birth register relating to the petitioner's daughter's birth. Having failed to get the correction allowed by the 1st respondent, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: “(i) issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the 1st Respondent to conduct an enquiry on Ext.P8 on the basis of Exts.P1 to P6 and correct Ext.P7 birth Certificate and Birth Register of petitioner's daughter.” 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st 2 respondent submits that the petitioner's application for correction has been rejected for specific reasons stated therein. The standing counsel points out that in that order itself it has been stated that if the petitioner files an application along with the documents mentioned in that order, the same would be promptly considered. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the petitioner files a fresh application for correction of date of birth accompanied by the documents, as directed by the 1st respondent in his order dated 12.12.2008, the 1st respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. I make it clear that I have not considered the matter on merits and that it would be open to the 1st respondent to consider such application in accordance with law. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 3