Allowed

Jignaben Dharmeshbhai Dhaduk v. Registrar of Birth and Death/ Chief Officer

Gujarat HC13 Jul 2022SCA/928/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Gujarat quashed an order rejecting a request to amend a birth certificate to reflect an adoptive father's name, finding the rejection based on a withdrawn government circular unlawful and directed a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; respondent directed to pass fresh order within four weeks considering previous precedents.

Jignaben Dharmeshbhai Dhaduk Vs Registrar of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

C/SCA/928/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/07/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 928 of 2022

¶4

================================================================ JIGNABEN DHARMESHBHAI DHADUK

¶5

Versus

¶6

REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATH/ CHIEF OFFICER

¶7

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

¶8

JIGNESHKUMAR P PANDAV(8297) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 NILESHKUMAR R MANIYA(8978) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Date : 13/07/2022 ORAL ORDER

¶11

Though served none appears on behalf of the
respondent authority.

¶12

1. RULE .

¶13

2.In the present writ petition, the petitioners
have assailed the order dated 29.09.2021, wherein
and whereby, the request of the petitioners to
change/mention name of petitioner No.2 in the
column of "father name” as 'Dharmesh Arjanbhai
Dhaduk' in place of 'Rakeshbhai Jaysukhbhai
Bhalala' as well as mentioning of new address in
the birth certificate of his son of the
petitioners has been rejected by the respondent
No.2.

¶14

3.The brief facts of the case are as under:

¶15

3.1Petitioner No.1 earlier married with one
Rakeshbhai Jaysukhbhai Bhalala and out of their
wedlock a son "Bhagya" was born on 21.02.2017.
Pursuant to that on 24.02.2017 his birth was

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

C/SCA/928/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/07/2022

¶18

registered with the respondent authority vide
Registration No.EZ-2017-2889 in the register,
which is maintained by the respondent authority
under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act,
1969. Since matrimonial disputes cropped-up
between the petitioner No.1 and her husband, they
decided to get separated and, therefore, they had
executed a deed of divorce on 11.07.2019 as per
their prevailing customs and thereby marriage of
petitioner No.1 with her earlier husband came to
be dissolved by the said deed. Since it was
decided by both the parties that custody of minor
son "Bhagya" will remain with wife i.e.
petitioner No.1 herein, the minor has been
residing with petitioner No.1.

¶19

3.2Thereafter, petitioner No.1 got married with
petitioner No.2 at Surat. After marriage of
petitioner No.2 with petitioner No.1, petitioner
No.2 also agreed to take all responsibilities of
minor son of petitioner No.1 and, therefore, he
has adopted the minor son 'Bhagya' with consent
of family members of both the petitioners and
pursuant to the said adoption, a deed of adoption
has been executed between the parties, which came
to be registered before the Office of Registrar
vide Registration No.3278 on 10.03.2021.

¶20

3.3Since petitioner No.1 got married with
petitioner No.2 and since petitioner No.2 has
adopted minor 'Bhagya' by way of execution of

¶21

Page 2 of 5

¶22

C/SCA/928/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/07/2022

¶23

registered adoption deed, petitioner No.2 became
natural/legal guardian of minor boy and,
therefore, the petitioners had made a request to
the respondent to replace/mention the name of
petitioner No.2 as father in place of name of
earlier husband of petitioner No.1 in the column
of 'father name' in the birth certificate issued
by the respondent authority. It is the cse of the
petitioners that The variation in father's name
of son of the petitioners in different documents
would create more difficulties in his future and
also it will come in way to the same while he
will process for passport, visa and other legal
formalities with the Governments of other
countries and, therefore, it is necessary for the
petitioners to get replaced/corrected the name of
petitioner No.2 as his father instead of his
biological father in the birth certificate by
entering the name of petitioner No.2 in column of
father name as ‘Dharmesh Arjanbhai Dhaduk' in
place of 'Rakeshbhai Jaysukhbhai Bhalala' so as
to avoid future difficulties.

¶24

3.4Due to above variations and above
difficulties, the petitioners made a written
representation to the authority on 24.09.2021
along with all the relevant documents of the
petitioners. Vide communication dated 29.09.2021,
the application of the petitioners for correction
has been rejected by the respondent authority,
relying upon Government Resolution dated
18.02.2016 and the petitioners has been asked to

¶25

Page 3 of 5

¶26

C/SCA/928/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/07/2022

¶27

produce adoption decree from the concerned court
with the registered adoption deed. Accordingly,
the petitioners have preferred the present
petition challenging the aforesaid order.

¶28

4.Learned advocate for the petitioners has
submitted that the authorities, while placing
reliance on the circular dated 18.02.2016 issued
by the State authority, which has been
subsequently withdrawn by the State authority
vide order dated 02.12.2021 has rejected the
application of the petitioners. Thus, he has
submitted that the impugned order may be set
aside. He has placed reliance on the judgement of
the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Sejalben Mukundbhai Patel W/o Khodabhai Joitaram
Patel Vs. State of Gujarat, 2019 (3) GLR 1866.

¶29

5.Heard the learned advocate for the
petitioners and also perused the documents as
pointed out by him.

¶30

6.In light of the undisputed facts, that the
circular dated 18.02.2016 issued by the State
authority, upon which the respondent authority
has placed reliance and rejected the application
of the petitioners, has been subsequently
withdrawn by the State authority vide order dated
02.12.2021, the impugned order dated 29.09.2021
passed by the respondent authority is hereby
quashed and set aside since the same is premised

¶31

Page 4 of 5

¶32

C/SCA/928/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/07/2022

¶33

on the circular dated 18.02.2016, which has been
subsequently withdrawn by the State authority.

¶34

7.The respondent authority is directed to pass
a fresh order on the application filed by the
petitioners with regard to change/mention name of
petitioner No.2, etc. in the birth certificate of
the minor son of the petitioners. The respondent
authority shall specifically consider the
decision of this Court dated 16.01.2019 passed in
the case of Sejalben Mukundbhai Patel (supra) and
pass necessary order on the application filed by
the petitioners by following necessary procedure,
as envisaged in Section 15 of the Registration of
Births and Deaths Act, 1969 read with Rule 11 of
the Gujarat Registration of Births and Deaths
Rules, 2004. Necessary order shall be passed and
communicated within a period of (04) four weeks
from the date of receipt of writ of the order of
this Court. It will be open for the petitioner(s)
to file a fresh application.

¶35

8.The present writ petition is allowed. Rule
made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

¶36

¶37

Bhavesh-[PPS]*

¶38

Page 5 of 5

Jignaben Dharmeshbhai Dhaduk v. Registrar of Birth and Death/ Chief Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jignaben Dharmeshbhai Dhaduk v. Registrar of Birth and Death/ Chief Officer

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

Hareshbhai Popatbhai Pansuriya Vs District Magistrate, Junagadh

Basuben Karshanbhai Bharwad Vs State of Gujarat

Meer Gabharoobhai Mandanbhai Vs State of Gujarat

Bachubhai Virabhai Bharwad Vs State of Gujarat

Bhavikkumar Vishnubhai Patel Vs Gandhinagar Municipal Corporation

Parmar Mitesh Hasmukhbhai Vs State of Gujarat