Disposed

S.Sakthi, v. The Assistant Director

Madras HC27 Jan 2020WP/1696/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to correct his date of birth from 31.07.1989 to 20.04.1990 in official records due to an earlier error. The court directed the respondent to issue notice for substantiating evidence and comply within the specified timeline, disposing of the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to respondent to call upon petitioner to produce certificates substantiating the actual date of birth and take corrective steps on or before 28.02.2020.

S.Sakthi, Vs The Assistant Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 27.01.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶5

W.P.No.1696 of 2020

¶6

S.Sakthi

¶7

The Assistant Director,

¶8

Commissionererate of Stationary and Printing, Chennai 600 002.

¶9

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to take appropriate action based upon the petitioner's representation dated 16.12.2019 and dispose of the same.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mariappan

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel, Additional Government Pleader O R D E R

¶12

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition in the nature of mandamus seeking direction to correct the date of birth from 31.07.1989 to 20.04.1990.

¶13

The petitioner was originally called as S.Sathyaraj, S/o.Selvakumar. He filed an application to change his name from S.Sathyaraj to S.Sakthi. This change of name was incorporated in the Tamilnadu Government Gazatte dated 03.06.2009. But, while applying for change of name, unfortunately he had given his date of birth wrongly as 31.07.1989. The petitioner has now enclosed all his educational certificates in which the date of birth is given as 20.04.1990.

¶14

representation to the respondent namely Assistant Director, Commissionerate of Stationary and Printing, Chennai to print the correct date of birth. This representation is dated 16.12.2019.

¶15

1/2

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for respondent.

¶18

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has not taken any steps towards rectifying the mistake made in the date of birth.

¶19

The learned counsel for the respondent states that the representation would be considered and orders will be passed in the representation.

¶20

In view of the above, it would only be proper that notice is issued by the respondent to the petitioner calling upon him to produce necessary certificates substantiating his grievance regarding the actual date of birth 20.04.1990 and thereafter take steps in accordance with rules to correct the date of birth. This process must be completed on or before 28.02.2020.

¶21

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vum To The Assistant Director, Commissionererate of Stationary and Printing, Chennai 600 002. +1 ccto Mr.N.Chinnaraj Advocate sr6078 +1 ccto Govt Pleader sr5728 W.P.No.1696 of 2020

¶22

spd(co) aa03/02/2020

¶23

2/2

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Sakthi, v. The Assistant Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sakthi, v. The Assistant Director

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

S.Anandan Vs The Commissioner

S.Kumarasamy, Vs The Commissioner

V.Anandan Vs The Member Secretary

K.a.Velayutham, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Meethelaveetil Kaitheri Muralidharan Vs Union of India

M.Vijayakumar Vs The Commissioner of Geology