Allowed

Dr.K.G.Sanjayan v. Cherthala Municipality

Kerala HC22 Dec 2021WP(C)/25227/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that the Registrar must correct the petitioner's date of birth in the birth register to align with his Aadhaar, passport, and other public documents. The court set aside the rejection order and directed fresh consideration of the application within 6 weeks.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition allowed, Ext.P14 set aside, and the 2nd respondent directed to correct the date of birth based on public documents within 6 weeks.

Dr.K.G.Sanjayan Vs Cherthala Municipality — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 1ST POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 25227 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

DR.K.G.SANJAYAN AGED 66 YEARS S/O K.N. GOVINDA PAI, KADALIKANDATHIL, CHERTHALA P.O., ALAPPUZHA, NOW RESIDING AT # 203, ANANDAMAYA APARTMENT, 17TH CROSS, NEAR NANDHINI HOTEL, J P NAGAR, 6TH PHASE BENGALURU SOUTI, KARNATAKA-560 078 BY ADVS. SRI B.PRAMOD SMT.NAMITHA JYOTHISH

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY MUNICIPAL OFFICE, CHERTHALA, PIN-688 524, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶10

2 THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, CHERTHALA, PIN-688 524. R1 BY ADV J.OM PRAKASH R2 BY SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK, GP.

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) 25227/2021

T.R. RAVI, J.

W.P.(C)No.25227 of 2021

¶16

Dated this the 22^nd day of December, 2021

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioner had applied for correction of his date of birth from 13.3.1955 to 30.11.1954. Initially, the application was rejected by the Municipality stating that the delay in applying has not been explained. The petitioner had filed W.P.(C)No.6596 of 2021 before this Court which was disposed of by Ext.P11 judgment dated 7.4.2021 directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner in the light of the public documents like the entries in the SSLC book, electoral ID card Aadhaar card, Indian passport and PAN card issued to the petitioner. The Municipality had filed a review petition against the judgment and as per Ext.P13 judgment this Court had disposed of the review petition finding that the anxiety expressed by the respondents that they would be flouting the circular of the Registrar is unfounded. This Court categorically held that the delay has already been properly explained by the petitioner and that the circular issued by t he Chief Registrar is only for the

¶19

WP(C) 25227/2021

¶20

¶21

purpose of ensuring that unwanted delayed applications are not entertained by the subordinate officers.

¶22

The 2^nd respondent has thereafter issued Ext.P14 wherein it is stated that there is a disparity between the dates regarding the date of birth of the petitioner and the other children born to his parents, in the details submitted by the petitioner. The reason stated for rejecting the application is that the attempt of the petitioner is to make the entries in the birth register correspond to the date in the school certificate.

¶23

A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents wherein it is stated that none of the date of births given by the petitioner regarding his siblings tally with the date of births entered in the birth register of the Cherthala Municipality. Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 provides that if it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry of a birth or death in any register kept by him under the Act is erroneous in form or substance, or has been fraudulently or improperly made, he may, subject to such rules as may be made by the State Government with respect to the conditions on which and the circumstances in which such entries may be corrected or cancelled, correct the error or cancel the entry by suitable entry in

¶24

WP(C) 25227/2021

¶25

¶26

the margin, without any alteration of the original entry, and shall sign the marginal entry and add thereto the date of the correction or cancellation. Rule 11 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 reads thus;

¶27

“ 11. Correction or cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths - (1) If it is reported to the Registrar that a clerical or formal error has been made in the register or if such error is otherwise noticed by him the Registrar shall enquire into the matter and if he is satisfied that any such error has been made, he shall correct the error (by correcting or cancelling the entry) as provided in section 15 and shall send an extract of the entry showing the error and how it has been corrected to the State Government or the officer specified by it in this behalf.

¶28

(2) If any person asserts that any entry in the register of births and deaths is erroneous in substance, the Registrar may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under section 15 upon production by that person a declaration setting forth the nature of the error and true facts of the case made by two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case.

¶29

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (2) the Registrar shall make report of any correction of the kind referred to therein giving necessary details to the State Government or the officer specified in this behalf.

¶30

WP(C) 25227/2021

¶31

¶32

(4) If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry in the register of births and deaths has been fraudulently or improperly made, he shall make a report giving necessary details to the officer authorised by the Chief Registrar by general or special order in this behalf under section 25 and on hearing from him take necessary action in the matter.

¶33

(5) In every case in which an entry is corrected or cancelled under this rule, intimation thereof should be sent to the permanent address of the person who has given information under section 8 or section 9.”

¶34

Rule 11(2) clearly says that if any person asserts that any entry in the register of births and deaths is erroneous in substance, the Registrar may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under Section 15 upon production by that person a declaration setting forth the nature of the error and true facts of the case, made by two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case.

¶35

It is thus evident that the lawmakers had also envisaged circumstances where mistakes may have crept into the register of births; and sufficient powers have been given to the authorities to correct the same. As long as the request is genuine and supported by public documents which had also been obtained in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the concerned

¶36

WP(C) 25227/2021

¶37

¶38

Statutes, there is no reason why a request should be rejected by the authorities under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the Rules. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had occasion to consider the importance of public documents while examining the issue regarding correction of the records of the Central Board of Secondary Education with regard to the date of births and names of students or their parents. In the decision in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE reported in (2021) 7 SCC 535)], the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that public documents like Aadhaar Card, election card, etc. enjoy a legal presumption of its correctness in terms of the provisions of the Evidence Act, 1872.

¶39

The counsel for the respondents brought to my notice the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Registrar (Births and Deaths) v. Jayakrishnan reported in [2003 (2) KLT 701] wherein a request made for correction of the birth register on the basis of the entry in the school register and the passport was rejected. However, a reading of the judgment will show that on facts there was sufficient material to show that the claim of the petitioner therein for correction of the date of birth was not justified having regard to the entries in the hospital register where the birth had taken place, which is a contemporaneous document

¶40

WP(C) 25227/2021

¶41

¶42

alongside the birth register. The above judgmen t cannot ha ve the effect of nullifying the evidentiary value of the public documents mentioned above, and as held by the apex court.

¶43

A reading of the provisions of the Registration of Births

¶44

and Deaths Act and Rules would show that sufficient powers are given to the Registrar even to make delayed registrations of cases where the concerned person had not applied within the time prescribed by the Statute. It can also be seen that even in cases of children who have been abandoned, there are provisions to register the births. In the case on hand, all the documents like the entry in the school register, the electoral card, Aadhaar card, passport and the PAN card issued by the Income-tax Department show the date of birth of the petitioner as 30.11.1954. There is no reason to doubt the entries in any of the above documents. I do not find anything wrong in a person seeking to correlate the date of his birth shown in all the public documents so as to bring them in conformity with each other. The petitioner has clearly stated that he intends to go over to the United States to join his daughter and for that purpose he requires his birth certificate also to be corrected showing his correct date of birth. I hence find that the reasoning in Ext.P14 cannot be sustained.

¶45

WP(C) 25227/2021

¶46

¶47

In the result, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P14 is set aside. The 2^nd respondent is directed to consider the application submitted by the petitioner afresh and pass fresh orders correcting the date of birth in accordance with Exts.P1 to P5 public documents, the relevance of which have already been explained in the judgment in Jigya Yadav (supra). Necessary orders shall be issued within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

T.R. RAVI JUDGE

dsn

WP(C) 25227/2021

PETITION	ER E	APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25227/2021 XHIBITS
Exhibit	P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PAGE OF THE SSLC BOOK ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit	P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTORAL ID CARD ISSUED FROM THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit	P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit	P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE INDIAN PASSPORT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit	P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE PAN CARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit	P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit	P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 4.2.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit	P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S BROTHER K.G.NARAYANA PAI
Exhibit	P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER'S SISTER SUMANGALA
Exhibit	P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.3.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit	P11	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.4.2021 IN WPC NO 6596/2021
Exhibit	P12	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 19.7.2021
Exhibit	P13	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.9.2021 IN R.P NO 606/2021
Exhibit	P14	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.10.2021 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDE	NTS'	EXTS:
EXT.R2(A	):	TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.R2(B	):	TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF THE BIRTH REGISTER MAINTAINED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY.

Dr.K.G.Sanjayan v. Cherthala Municipality

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.K.G.Sanjayan v. Cherthala Municipality

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

V.v.Brijit Vs State of Kerala

Thampi P.P Vs Fresh Cut Organic Products Pvt. Ltd.

Bijudas Vs Elappully Grama Panchayat

Siddique Vs Mohammed Thondikkodan

Firoz Vs State of Kerala

Fuhad Keloth Panchara, Vs State of Kerala