Allowed

P.P.Kannan v. the Director of Printing

Kerala HC7 Aug 2017WP(C)/21312/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought notification of a changed name by adding an initial; respondent rejected it for inadequate certificate and missing school book page; court directed production of documents and ordered name change notification.

What did the court decide?

Directing the first respondent to notify the change of name of the petitioner on strength of the original certificate and cover page of his SSLC Book.

P.P.Kannan Vs the Director of Printing — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/16TH SRAVANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 21312 of 2017 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

P.P.KANNAN., NIKARTHIL, SOUTH ARYAD, AVALOOKKUNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING, O/O. THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶11

2. THE STATE OF KERALA,

¶12

REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SURIN GEORGE IYPE

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

sts

¶16

WP(C).No. 21312 of 2017 (L)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 15.5.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DRAFT NOTIFICATION DATED 15.5.2017.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHALAN EVIDENCING THE REMITTANCE OF THE PRINTING CHARGES DATED 16.5.2017.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER/COMMUNICATION NO.11452/17/D5 DATED 6.6.2017 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶23

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 15.5.2017.

¶24

EXHIBIT P5(A): TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT/ENGINEER LSGD SECTION, MARARIKULAM NORTH, PANCHAYAT DATED 16.5.2017.

¶25

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ONE AND THE SAME CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOMALAPURAM DATED 04/08/2017

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.(C).No.21312 of 2017-L.

¶34

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

¶35

Dated this the 7^th day of August, 2017.

¶36

J U D G M E N T

¶37

The name of the petitioner was P.P.Kannan. He changed his name as P.P.U.Kannan. Thereupon, the petitioner submitted an application to the first respondent to notify the changed name. The application has been rejected by the first respondent as per Ext.P4 communication. Ext.P4 communication is under challenge in this writ petition.

¶38

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

¶39

Ext.P4 communication indicates that the

¶40

application of the petitioner has been rejected for three reasons. The first reason is that the petitioner cannot add an initial to his name, the second reason stated is that the one and the same person certificate produced by the petitioner is not in order, and the third reason is that the petitioner has not produced the cover

¶41

WP.(C).No.21312/2017-L.

¶42

¶43

page of his SSLC Book.

¶44

Change of name is not governed by any statute. As such, an individual is entitled to change his name the way in which he wants others to identify him. The request before the first respondent was only for the publication of the changed name of the petitioner. There is, therefore, absolutely no basis for the stand taken by the first respondent that the petitioner cannot change his name by adding an initial. It is seen that Ext.P5 one and the same certificate produced by the petitioner does not recite that the petitioner is known as P.P.U.Kannan also. The same is the defect noted by the first respondent as regards Ext.P5 certificate. The petitioner, therefore, applied for and obtained another certificate from the Village Officer which certifies that the petitioner is known as P.P.U.Kannan as well. Ext.P6 is the said certificate. The petitioner has no difficulty in producing the cover page of his SSLC Book before the first respondent.

¶45

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to produce the original of Ext.P6 certificate and the cover page of his SSLC Book before the first

¶46

WP.(C).No.21312/2017-L.

¶47

¶48

respondent and directing the first respondent to notify the change of name of the petitioner as requested for by him on the strength of the said documents.

¶49

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶50

Kvs/-

¶51

// true copy //

P.P.Kannan v. the Director of Printing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.P.Kannan v. the Director of Printing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Mohandas Vs Padmakumar

Lal Koilparambil Vs State of Kerala

B. Surendradas Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Hakeem Vs the Superintending Engineer

V.T.Mathew Vs District Collector

Mony v.Athukuzhy Vs District Collector