Disposed

Gopi Dhirajlal Manvar v. Sub Registrar, Birth and Death Registration Dept.

Gujarat HC22 Aug 2019SCA/5331/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought correction of date of birth in Birth Certificate via Article 226 writ. Court relied on precedents to direct the Registrar to reconsider the petitioner's rectification application within four weeks after hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent to reconsider petitioner's application for rectification of date of birth within four weeks after hearing.

Gopi Dhirajlal Manvar Vs Sub Registrar, Birth and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Gujarat HC (2019)

¶1

C/SCA/5331/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5331 of 2019

¶4

================================================================

¶5

GOPI DHIRAJLAL MANVAR

¶6

Versus

¶7

SUB REGISTRAR, BIRTH AND DEATH REGISTRATION DEPT.

¶8

================================================================ Appearance:

¶9

MR. RISHIN R PATEL(7222) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR DHAWAN M JAYSWAL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the Respondent(s) No. 2

¶10

MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶11

================================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

¶13

Date : 22/08/2019

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to make necessary correction in the Birth Certificate of the petitioner for mentioning the correct date of birth.

¶16

It is the case of the petitioner that the Birth Certificate reflects the date of birth of the petitioner as '20.10.1988' whereas the correct/real date of birth of the petitioner is '20.07.1988'. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was born on 20.07.1988 and thereafter, the birth was registered in the birth records maintained by the respondent No.1. However, the above discrepancy crept in and the Birth Certificate was issued showing the wrong date of birth.

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

C/SCA/5331/2019 ORDER

¶19

Learned Advocate for the petitioner states that the other documents pertaining to her date of birth like School Leaving Certificate, Passport, PAN Card, Aadhar Card, Election Card and Driving License reflects the correct birth date. It is the case of the petitioner that as the petitioner intends to permanently settle down abroad, the petitioner had submitted necessary documents to a Visa Consultant who in turn informed the petitioner that the application for visa / permanent residency might be rejected on account of the discrepancy in the date of birth shown in the Birth Certificate and the subsequent documents.

¶20

To remove this discrepancy, the petitioner had made an application to respondent No.1 praying for correction in the birth date as well as for issuance of a fresh birth certificate incorporating the correct date of birth. However, the respondent rejected the application of the petitioner vide the impugned communication dated 18.12.2018.

¶21

In identical facts situation this Court in the judgment in the case of Nitaben Nareshbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat reported in 2008 (1) GLR 884 and an unreported judgment in the case of Sachin Natwarlal Patel v. Registrar of Births and Deaths cum Talati cum Mantri in Special Civil Application No.9564/2018 dated 07.01.2019 has issued directions. Considering the ratio of the aforesaid judgments, it is clear that the Registering Authority is within its power under Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Death Act, 1969 and Rule 11 of the Gujarat Registration of Birth and Death Act, 2004, to correct the error as prayed for. Besides,

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

C/SCA/5331/2019 ORDER

¶24

the correction sought is only an innocuous one and the petitioner does not seek to derive any undue advantage out of such a change.

¶25

In view of the aforesaid legal position, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent No.1 to re-consider the application of the petitioner for rectifying the mistake and correcting the petitioner's date of birth as mentioned in this petition, within a period of four weeks after receipt of writ of the order of this Court, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also considering the observations made by this Court in the aforementioned judgments.

¶26

With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of. Direct Service is permitted.

¶27

Sd/- (A.Y. KOGJE, J)

¶28

Caroline

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Gopi Dhirajlal Manvar v. Sub Registrar, Birth and Death Registration Dept.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopi Dhirajlal Manvar v. Sub Registrar, Birth and Death Registration Dept.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhesing Saybabhai Bariya Vs State of Gujarat

Ashvinkumar S/O Ramanlal Solanki through Sureshbhai Devjibhai Solanki Vs State of Gujarat

Gajiben Punjaji Ramsangji Thakor Thru. Son Raijiji Punjaji Thakor Vs the Police Commissioner

Makwana Narendrabhai Dhanabhai Vs Union of India

Bhavik Jagdishbhai Kotecha Vs State of Gujarat

Jignesh Kantibhai Kotecha Vs State of Gujarat