IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / 25TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 35325 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ AJAY THOMAS (KARINGADA) ANASWARA, T.C.5/1965/1, PEROOR NAGAR, KOWDIAR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.C.JAMES RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE REGISTGRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA SRI.N.NANDAKUMARAMENON, SC FOR CORPN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 35325 OF 2009 (I) ===================== Dated this the 15th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior counsel appearing for 1st respondent. 2. The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P11 order passed by the 1st respondent rejecting an application made by the petitioner for correction of his name in the register maintained by the said respondent. According to the petitioner, his name has been entered as Jose Thomas, Karingada. Producing Exts.P2 to P9, the petitioner wanted the said name to be corrected as Ajay Thomas. It was this request that is rejected by Ext.P11 stating that in view of the provisions contained in Section 14 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the circular issued by the Chief Registrar dated 20/3/2007, correction cannot be effected. 3. This Court has in several cases including Varghese v. Director of Panchayat (2008(2) KLT 278) held that it is well within the power of the respondents to entertain application for correction. Therefore, the reasoning in Ext.P11 cannot be WPC 35325/09 :2 : accepted. Therefore quashing Ext.P11, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the application made by the petitioner in the light of the documents produced and pass fresh orders. 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