IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 24818 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOSEPH THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS ULAHANNAN, KOCHU THEKKEL (ERATHU) KANAYAKKAVAYAL P.O., ANNAS, PEERUMADE, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE PERUVANTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PERUVANTHANAM P.O., PEERUMADE, IDUKKI, PIN-685 532. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATH PERUVANTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PERUVANTHANAM P.O., PEERUMADE, IDUKKI, PIN-685 532. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) No.24818 of 2010 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE SSLC BOOK OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE INDIAN PASSPORT NO. H-2167554 OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER ISSUED FROM BANGALORE. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE BAPTISM CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VICAR OF ST.ANTONY'S CHURCH, PERUVANTHANAM, IDUKKI DATED 17.7.2009. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF EMPLOYMENT DATED 15.6.2010 ISSUED FROM RAMSAY HEALTH CARE, AUSTRALIA TO THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION AND POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 3.8.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.68413/RD-3/2009/LSGD DATED 21.1.2010 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A8-3706/2010 DATED 6.8.2010 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE REGISTER OF BAPTISM FROM THE PARISH PRIEST ON 14.8.2010 MAINTAINED IN ST.ANTONY'S CHURCH, NIMALAGIRI, PERUVANTHANAM, IDUKKI DURING 1974-75. RESPONDENT'S EXTS: EXT.R1(a) TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF BIRTH REGISTER OF PERUVANTHANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24818 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the father of Smt.Rosamma Joseph who is presently employed as a Nurse in Australia. As per the entries in Ext.P1, which is a true copy of the relevant page of the Secondary School Leaving Certificate and Ext.P2 passport, her date of birth is 1.5.1975. The birth of the petitioner's daughter was registered on 8.7.1975 with the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Peruvanthanam Grama Panchayat. The date of birth was given as 5.7.1975. The information regarding the birth was given by the petitioner himself. However, when Smt.Rosamma Joseph was admitted in the school, her date of birth was given as 1.5.1975 which is stated to be the correct date of birth. On that basis, the petitioner's daughter obtained a passport and went abroad. 2. After the petitioner's daughter took up employment as Nurse in Australia, the officers in the Indian Consulate asked her to produce a copy of the birth certificate. Thereupon, as instructed by his daughter, the petitioner applied for and obtained Ext.P5 birth certificate. He then realised that the date of birth is shown as 5.7.1975. In view of the disparity in the date of birth as entered in W.P.(C) No.24818/2010 2 the school records and in the register of births, the petitioner on behalf of his daughter submitted Ext.P6 application to the Secretary, Peruvanthanam Grama Panchayat, who is also the Registrar of Births and Deaths of that Panchayat for correcting the entry regarding the date of birth in the register of births maintained by the Panchayat. The said application was rejected by Ext.P8 order dated 6.8.2010 on the short ground that as the date of birth was entered as 5.7.1975 in the register of births on the basis of the information given by the petitioner himself, the date of birth cannot be corrected in the register of births. Ext.P8 is under challenge in this writ petition. It is contended that Registrar of Births and Deaths ought to have taken note of the provisions contained in Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 and rule 11 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1970 and corrected the date of birth in the register of births as 1.5.1975 having regard to the weighty evidence in the form of the SSLC book. It is contended that as the parent who furnished the information has himself moved for correction of the date of birth and there is not much of a time gap between 1.5.1975 and 5.7.1975, the second respondent ought to have corrected the entry in the register of births and issued a fresh birth certificate certifying the date of birth of the petitioner's daughter as 1.5.1975. W.P.(C) No.24818/2010 3 3. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit resisting the writ petition. It is contended that birth of the petitioner's daughter was registered on 8.7.1975 on the basis of the information furnished by the petitioner himself. It is stated that it was the petitioner who gave the date of birth as 5.7.1975 and that the petitioner cannot therefore be heard to contend that the entry regarding the date of birth in the register of births was mistakenly made. Though the petitioner has not filed a reply affidavit, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, as is natural, would have forgotten to register the birth within 14 days from 1.5.1975 and later registered the same giving the date of birth as 5.7.1975, on the fear of facing prosecution for not registering the date of birth in time. 4. I have considered the rival submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel on either side. The power of the Registrar of Births and Deaths to correct the entries in the Register of Births and Deaths is recognised under section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 and rule 11 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1970. The said provisions empower the registering authority, to correct the error or cancel the entry by making a suitable entry in the margin without any alteration of the original entry if he is W.P.(C) No.24818/2010 4 satisfied that the entry regarding the date of birth is erroneous in form or substance. 5. In the instant case, the Registrar of Births and Deaths of Peruvanthanam Grama Panchayat has declined to act on Ext.P6 application on the short ground that the date of birth of the petitioner's daughter was given as 5.7.1975 by the petitioner himself, and therefore, the date of birth cannot be altered in the register. I am afraid, the stand taken by the respondents in Ext.P6 cannot be sustained. When the petitioner applied for change of the date of birth, he had stated in the application that the date of birth was wrongly given as 5.7.1975 . The Registrar of Births and Deaths has lost sight of the said significant fact, when he rejected the application for change of the date of birth. Ext.P2 Secondary School Leaving Certificate discloses that the date of birth of the petitioner's daughter was entered in the school records as 1.5.1975. The same is the date of birth given in the passport which she holds. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Peruvanthanam Grama Panchayat ought to have entertained the application submitted by the petitioner and considered the same on the merits, instead of rejecting it at the threshhold. 6. Rule 12(4) of the Registration of Births and Deaths W.P.(C) No.24818/2010 5 Rules, 1970 stipulates that if any person asserts that any entry in the Register of Births and Deaths is erroneous, the Registrar may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under section 15 upon production by that person a declaration setting forth the nature of the error and the true facts of the case made by two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case. I am of the opinion that the Registrar of Births and Deaths ought to have corrected the date of birth of the petitioner's daughter as 1.5.1975 after calling upon the petitioner to produce a declaration in terms of rule 12(4) and to produce other materials like Baptism records to prove that a girl child was born to the petitioner and his wife Smt.Annamma on 1.5.1975. In such circumstances, I am persuaded to hold that Ext.P8 cannot be sustained. In the result, I quash Ext.P8 order and dispose of the writ petition with the following directions. i) The second respondent shall take back the original of Ext.P6 application filed by the petitioner to file, on the petitioner producing a declaration by two credible persons having knowledge of the fact of the birth of the petitioner's daughter, Smt.Rosamma Joseph, and certified extracts from the Baptism register issued by W.P.(C) No.24818/2010 6 the Vicar of the Church where she was baptised and also the copies of the SSLC Book and Passport. ii) The second respondent shall within three weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces the above documents, cause an enquiry to be conducted and take an appropriate decision in the matter, and if he is satisfied that the date of birth should be corrected as prayed for by the petitioner, make necessary entries in the Register of Births and Deaths and issue a certified extract from the Register to the petitioner. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. nj. The words “rule 12(4)” occurring in the 1st and 10th lines of paragraph 6 of the judgment dated 02/09/2010 in WP(C) 24818/2010 are substituted by the words “rule 11(2)” as per order dated 27/09/2010 in I.A.12768/2010. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)