Remanded

Kaushal Ajaykumar Chavda v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC20 Feb 2020SCA/1018/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An oral order by Justice A.Y. Kogje remanding a writ petition to the Registrar to amend the petitioner's birth certificate by replacing his father's name with his mother's name and surname, following his claim of maternal guardianship. The court relied on precedents and granted eight weeks for compliance. Direct service was permitted.

What did the court decide?

Remand to respondent to replace father's name with mother's name in the Birth Certificate within eight weeks.

Kaushal Ajaykumar Chavda Vs State of Gujarat — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

C/SCA/1018/2020 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1018 of 2020

¶4

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

¶5

KAUSHAL AJAYKUMAR CHAVDA

¶6

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

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

¶8

MR MEHUL M MEHTA(3416) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR KM ANTANI, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MS ASMITA PATEL for the Respondent(s) No. 2

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

¶11

Date : 20/02/2020 ORAL ORDER

¶12

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 replacing the name of the petitioner's father and surname with the name of the petitioner's mother and surname.

¶13

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was born on 27.08.1997 at Rajkot and the Birth Certificate was issued by the respondent authority accordingly. However, the parents of the petitioner had a matrimonial dispute, as a result of which the petitioner's mother committed suicide. It is submitted that the petitioner was brought up by his maternal grandparents from his childhood till today and is now is pursing his MBA.

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

C/SCA/1018/2020 ORDER

¶16

It is submitted that the petitioner had preferred an application dated 15.05.2019 before the respondent No.2, praying for replacing the name of the father and the surname with the name of his mother and surname and also prayed for issuance of a new Birth Certificate. However, the respondent No.2 by way of the impugned communication dated 10.06.2019 rejected the application of the petitioner.

¶17

To be substantiate his submissions, learned Advocate for the petitioner relies upon the following decisions of this Court :- Order dated 18.03.2013 passed in Special Civil Application No.1017/2013 ( Hina Rameshchandra Trivedi v. State of Gujarat and Another ) and;

¶18

Judgment dated 24.01.2014 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.938/2013 in Special Civil Application No.1017/2013 ( Registrar Births-Death Department v. State of Gujarat and Other ).

¶19

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 another judgment in the case of Sejalben Mukulbhai Patel W/o. Khodabhai Joitaram Patel v. State of Gujarat and Another reported in AIR 2019 Gujarat 56 has issued directions. Considering

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

C/SCA/1018/2020 ORDER

¶22

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 carry out the changes as prayed for.

¶23

Upon issuance of Notice, learned Advocate Ms. Asmita Patel appears for the respondent authority. In view of the aforesaid legal position, it would be appropriate to remand the matter to the respondent No.2 and direct the respondent No.2 for replacing the name of the petitioner's father and surname with the name of the petitioner's mother and surname, as mentioned in this petition, within a period of eight weeks after receipt of writ of the order of this Court, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and considering the observations made by this Court in the aforementioned judgments.

¶24

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

Sd/-

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)

CAROLINE

Page 3 of 3

Kaushal Ajaykumar Chavda v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal Ajaykumar Chavda v. State of Gujarat

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

Dineshkumar S/O Sitaram Bhuchu Mandal Vs State of Gujarat

Priyanka Priyadarshini Shrikant Pairai Vs State of Gujarat

Vishram @ Vishrambhai Roopasi Bhagora (Deleted) Vs State of Gujarat

Manharbhai Jayrambhai Hirpara Vs State of Gujarat

Balaji Logistic Vs Union of India

Narendra Roadlines Vs Union of India