IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25585 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. KURIAN JOY AGED 10 YEARS, S/o. JOY PAUL, NADACKAL HOUSE, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER GUARDIAN JOY PAUL. BY ADV. SRI.BEPIN VIJAYAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE HEALTH OFFICER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND, SC, COCHIN CORPN. FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 25585 OF 2008 U = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of August 2008 J U D G M E N T The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the 2nd respondent to permit correction of the name of the petitioner herein in the birth register maintained by the 1st respondent. Ext. P6 is the application made by the petitioner, which according to him has been delivered to the 2nd respondent and the receipt of which is acknowledged in Ext. P7. It is complaining that no action has been taken on Ext. P6, this writ petition has been filed. 2. Standing counsel for the respondents, submits that an application has been received and that in view of the circular issued by the Chief Registrar (Director of Panchayats) dated 20.3.2007, an enquiry is to be initiated. 3. Since admittedly, the application has been made by the petitioner, it is for the 2nd respondent to conduct necessary enquiry in terms of the circular referred to above. Though it is stated in the W.P.(C) No. 25585 OF 2008 -2- instruction furnished to the counsel that since the name declared by the parents of the petitioner was his pet name there is no mistake to be corrected, this reasoning of the 2nd respondent cannot be accepted. According to the petitioner, what is sought to be incorporated is the correct name and that it was by a mistake that the pet name was declared and got incorporated in the Corporation records. In my view this is certainly a matter for the 2nd respondent to conduct necessary enquiry and remedy the situation, in view of the judgment of this Court in Varghese v. Director of Panchayats {2008(2) KLT 278}. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 2nd respondent shall conduct necessary enquiries into Ext. P6 and on conclusion thereof necessary changes shall be made in the birth register taking into account Exts. P2 to P4 also, within one week. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-