SCA/9060/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9060 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= GOVINDBHAI NARAYANBHAI MIRCHANDANI - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR.HIREN M MODI for Petitioner(s) : 1, MS HANSA PUNANI, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 10/07/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Notice. Ms. Hansa Punani, learned AGP waives service of notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. SCA/9060/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT 2. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is further heard. 3. The petitioner has preferred the petition for appropriate directions to the respondents to accept the application for correction of the birth date, and it is also prayed to issue fresh birth certificate having corrected birth date. 4. Upon hearing Mr. Hiren Modi learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Hansa Punani learned AGP, it appears that it is an admitted position that up till now the petitioner has not made any application, but only oral statement is made that the petitioner wanted to make application to respondent No. 2 and as per the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 declined to accept the application. It is also an admitted facts that up till now, no decision is rendered in either way, of accepting of application or of rejecting application. 5. Under these circumstances, the mandamus cannot be issued to the authority to correct birth date and to issue the fresh certificate. SCA/9060/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT 6. However, considering the facts and circumstances, it is directed that if the petitioner makes representation to respondent No. 2 within two weeks for correction of the birth date, the same shall be accepted and entertained by the respondent No. 2, and he shall decide the application either for correction of the birth date, or for rejection of such application. Such decision shall be rendered within one month from the receipt of such application by respondent No. 2. 7. Subject to the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) Suresh*