IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH SATURDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2009 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1931 WA.No. 956 of 2009 -------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.10100/2009 DATED 2.4.2009 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2. ---------------------------------------------------- 1. REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS AND HEALTH INSPECTOR, GRADE-I, KANHANGAD MUNCIPALITY, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. SECRETARY, KANHANGAD MUNCIPALITY, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS SMT.P.K.PRIYA RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. JOSE ELLICKAL, ANNUR P.O., MOORIKOVAL, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR. 2. THE CHIEF REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA R1 BY ADV.SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.956 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 23rd day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. This writ appeal is filed by the first respondent mainly aggrieved by the observations in the judgment under appeal and the imposition of costs. We have already disposed of W.A.No.742 of 2009 recording the fact that the disputed date of birth has already been corrected. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the first appellant took charge of the office only on 28.1.2009. It is further submitted that the first appellant had not received any legal opinion as referred to in the judgment and the moment the superior officer gave the communication, correction was carried out and the corrected certificate was also issued to the party. Learned counsel also submits that the first appellant would be more cautious in future and will not give room for any complaint of this sort. In W.A.No.956 of 2009 - 2 - view of the apologetic stand thus taken by the first appellant, we are of the view that the adverse observations made against the first appellant in the impugned judgment have to be expunged and the imposition of costs is also to be vacated. Ordered accordingly. The adverse observations in the judgment are expunged and the order on costs is also vacated. Writ appeal is disposed of as above. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns