Allowed

Deepak Chandran v. Birth and Death Registrar

Kerala HC10 Aug 2022WP(C)/16/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the refusal to correct a petitioner's Date of Birth. It directed the hospital to endorse the correct time and date in its register, and the Registrar to issue a corrected Birth Certificate within one month.

What did the court decide?

The 3rd respondent to record the correct time and date (11.35 pm, 18.03.1994) in the Gynec Register; the 1st respondent to issue a corrected Birth Certificate within one month.

Deepak Chandran Vs Birth and Death… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022/19TH SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 16 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

DEEPAK CHANDRAN AGED 27 YEARS S/O. CHANDRAN K., 'CHANDRAGEETHAM', ANNUR, P.O.ANNUR, PUTHIYANKAVU ROAD, PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER CHANDRAN K, S/O. NARAYANNA K, AGED 63 YEARS, 'CHANDRAGEETHAM', PUTHIYANKAVU ROAD, P.O.ANNUR, PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670307.

¶7

BY ADV M.V.AMARESAN

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 BIRTH AND DEATH REGISTRAR PAYYANUR MUNICIPALITY, P.O.PAYYANUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670307.

¶10

2 DR.GOPINATHAN, GYNAECOLOGIST, MUKUNDA HOSPITAL, PAYYANUR, P.O.PAYYANUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670307.

¶11

3 MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT, MUKUNDA HOSPITAL, PAYYANUR, P.O.PAYYANUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670307.

¶12

BY ADVS. M.SASINDRAN P.V.ANOOP PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP M.P.PRIYESHKUMAR K.V.SREERAJ

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

: 2 :

N. NAGARESH, J.

W.P.(C) No.16 of 2022

¶19

Dated this the 10^th day of August, 2022

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

¶22

The petitioner is aggrieved by the refusal of the Registrar of Births and Deaths to correct the Date of Birth of the petitioner in the Birth Register.

¶23

The petitioner is the son of Lt. Col. Chandran K. and Geetha P.V. The petitioner was born in the 3^rd respondent’s hospital on 18.03.1994 at 11.35 pm.

¶24

The petitioner's Date of Birth is correctly recorded as 18.03.1994 in his School records, Horoscope, SSLC and Passport. In the Indian Army’s service records relating to the petitioner’s father, the Date of Birth of the petitioner is

¶25

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶26

: 3 :

¶27

recorded as 18.03.1994, contends the petitioner.

¶28

The petitioner wanted to pursue his higher studies in UK in the year 2022 and it was then noted that in the Birth Register, the Date of Birth is erroneously recorded as 19.03.1994 and in Ext.P6 Birth Certificate also, the error was carried forward. On verification, the petitioner found that in the Hospital Records / Gynec Register, the date of birth of the petitioner was erroneously shown as 19.03.1994 at 2.35 am.

¶29

The petitioner hence approached the 1^st respondent-Registrar seeking to correct his Date of Birth in the Birth Register. The 1^st respondent informed the petitioner that he cannot correct the Register as long as the Hospital authorities do not provide the correct Date of Birth. The petitioner hence filed the writ petition.

¶30

On 01.02.2022, this Court passed an interim order directing the 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 application submitted by the petitioner for correction of Date of Birth with due regard to the affidavits filed in

¶31

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶32

: 4 :

¶33

support by the petitioner. The 1^st respondent, however, rejected Ext.P7 application as per Ext.P10 order. The petitioner thereupon amended the writ petition challenging Ext.P10 order.

¶34

The respondents entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the 1^st respondent, it was submitted that the 1^st respondent has to go by the records maintained by the Hospital and cannot effect any correction departing from the information provided by the 3^rd respondent’s hospital. There is no illegality in Ext.P10 order, contended the 1^st respondent. The counsel for respondents 2 and 3 urged that their Gynec Register is maintained properly and chronologically and there cannot be an error in their records.

¶35

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent and the learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3.

¶36

The petitioner’s career is at stake due to the anomaly in the records and certificates with regard to the

¶37

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶38

: 5 :

¶39

Date of Birth recorded. The petitioner's Date of Birth is recorded as 18.03.1994 in his School records, Horoscope, SSLC and Passport. In the Indian Army’s service records relating to the petitioner’s father, the Date of Birth is recorded as 18.03.1994. However, in the Gynec Register maintained by the Hospital, the time of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 19.03.1994 at 02.35 a.m.

¶40

The petitioner would submit that the time of his birth is 11.35 p.m. on 18.03.1994. The difference in time of birth in Hospital Register is 3 hours. But, due to this, the Date of Birth has been changed by a day. As far as the petitioner’s family is concerned, the difference is substantial as they belong to an orthodox family and taking into consideration the time of birth, the family had prepared Horoscope of the petitioner, wherein the birth is at 11.35 p.m. on 18.03.1994.

¶41

The School records, the SSLC Book and the Passport issued to the petitioner would show that the Date of Birth is recorded as 18.03.1994. Moreover, the petitioner’s

¶42

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶43

: 6 :

¶44

father was Lieutenant Colonel in Indian Armed Forces and in his service records also, the Date of Birth of the petitioner is recorded as 18.03.1994. But, due to the recording of time of birth as 02.35 a.m. on 19.03.1994 in the Hospital records, the petitioner is unable to obtain a Birth Certificate from the Registrar showing the Date of Birth in consonance with other records including service records of the petitioner’s father and the Passport issued to the petitioner.

¶45

The petitioner would state that he has seen the relevant Hospital records which are not maintained properly. There are corrections and overwritings in the Gynec Register and many columns are left blank. The Gynec Register is unreliable. The 3^rd respondent-Medical Superintendent of the Hospital, on the other hand, would point out that there were other births registered in the Hospital on 18.03.1994 and 19.03.1994 and all the births were recorded chronologically in the order of time of birth. There is no chance of any error or manipulation in the registration.

¶46

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶47

: 7 :

¶48

I do not deem it necessary to pronounce on the commission of any error in the Gynec records of the Hospital at this distance of time, after expiry of 28 years. The fact remains that the petitioner’s parents, who have first hand knowledge of the time and Date of Birth of the petitioner, have recorded the Date of Birth as 18.03.1994 years ago when the petitioner was admitted for schooling.

¶49

All other official records including the Passport of the petitioner and the service records maintained by the Indian Army, carry the same Date of Birth. If a different Date of Birth is recorded and maintained in the Birth Register, it would adversely affect the career prospects of the petitioner. The difference in the dates of birth is only one day.

¶50

In the peculiar facts of this case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3^rd respondent to make an endorsement in their Gynec Register/ Birth Register showing the time and Date of Birth of the petitioner as 11.35 p.m. 18.03.1994. There will be a consequential direction to the 1^st respondent to make necessary correction in the Birth

¶51

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶52

: 8 :

¶53

Register maintained by him based on the afore direction and issue a Birth Certificate to the petitioner showing his Date of

¶54

Birth as 18.03.1994, within a period of one month.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/22.09.2022

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

: 9 :

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16/2022

¶61

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶62

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY	OF HOROSCOPE OF THE
	PETITIONER ASTROLOGER.	ISSUED BY A COMPETENT
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY	OF FIRST PAGE OF SSLC BOOK
	BEARING N PETITIONER	O.M/10/06594/451916 OF THE DATED 28.5.2010.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY	OF RELEVANT PAGES OF INDIAN
	PASSPORT	OF THE PETITIONER BEARING
	NO.T 345029	4.
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY PETITIONER'	OF SERVICE BOOK OF THE S FATHER WHICH REFLECTS THE
	PETITIONER' 18.3.1994.	S DATE OF BIRTH AS
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY 17.11.2021	OF ADMISSION LETTER DATED ISSUED BY CARDIFF
	METROPOLITA PETITIONER.	N UNIVERSITY, U.K. TO THE
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY PETITIONER 1ST RESPOND	OF BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE DATED 23.3.2010 ISSUED BY ENT.
Exhibit P7	TRUE COP 29/10/2022	Y OF APPLICATION DATED FOR CORRECTION OF DATE OF
	BIRTH SUB BEFORE THE	MITTED BY THE PETITIONER 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7(a)	TRUE COPY SWORN TO SUBMITTED B	OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 29/1/2022 BY A.V.KAMALAKSHAN ADIYODI EFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7(b)	TRUE COPY GAYATHRI BEFORE THE	OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY DATED 29/1/22 SUBMITTED 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7(c)	TRUE COPY GEETHA.P BEFORE THE	OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY DATED 29/1/22 SUBMITTED 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8	TRUE COPY 29/1/2022RE	OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED CEIVED BY 1ST RESPONDENT

¶63

W.P.(C) No.16/2022

¶64

: 10 :

¶65

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF BOARDING PASS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING NO. H11951/2022 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

Deepak Chandran v. Birth and Death Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Chandran v. Birth and Death Registrar

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

Asma N.A Vs Kaiparambu Grama Panchayat

Madathara Granites (P) Ltd. Vs District Collector

N M R Siraj Vs Corporation of Kochi

Husain. M Vs Perinthalmanna Municipality

Haskar.M Vs Perinthalmanna Municipality

Abi Itty Jacob Vs the State of Kerala