K. J. Joseph v. Ramankary Grama Panchayath, Ramankary, Alappuzha; The Secretary, Ramankary Grama Panchayath; The State of Kerala, represented by the Secretary to Local Administration Department

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 1747 of 2018** **----------------------** ## **PETITIONER:** ## **----------** **K.J. JOSEPH, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. JOHN, KALATHINADI, THEKKEKKARA P.O., MONCOMPU, NOW RESIDING AT KALATHINADI, NADUBHAGOM, CHAMPAKKULAM P.O.** **BY ADVS.SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN SMT.T.J.SEEMA** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** ## **--------------** **1. THE RAMANKARY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RAMANKARY, ALAPPUZHA-689595.** **2. THE SECRETARY, RAMANKARY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, RAMANKARY, ALAPPUZHA-689595.** **3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-690001.** **R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SAGI JACON PALATTY** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **mbr/** ## **WP(C).No. 1747 of 2018 (P) -------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:** ## **----------------------** |**EXHIBIT P1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE S. S. L. C. CERTIFICATE OF THE**| |---|---| ||**PETITIONER'S SON BIBIN.**| |**EXHIBIT P2**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION IDENTITY CARD OF THE**| ||**PETITIONER'S SON.**| |**EXHIBIT P3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PAN CARD OF THE PETITIONER'S**| ||**SON.**| |**EXHIBIT P4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF BAPTISM ISSUED**| ||**BY THE ARCHDIOCESE, CHANGANASSERY.**| |**EXHIBIT P5**|**TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE**| ||**PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER'S SON.**| |**EXHIBIT P6**|**TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE**| ||**1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.08.2017.**| |**EXHIBIT P7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 23.4.2018**| ||**EXECUTED BY THE SON OF THE PETITIONER.**| |**RESPONDENTS'**|**EXHIBITS:**<br>**NIL**| |**---------------------**|| **/TRUE COPY/** **P.S.TO JUDGE** **mbr/ 02.07.2018.** ## ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C).No.1747 Of 2018 --------------------------------Dated this the 29th day of June, 2018. ## J U D G M E N T The petitioner is essentially championing the cause of his son, Bibin Joseph, who is now working in United States of America. The petitioner has produced Ext.P-7, copy of the power of attorney executed by his son in favour of the petitioner authorising the petitioner to conduct litigative proceedings for an on behalf of his son, etc., in the matter of his proposed application for correction of his Date of Birth as entered in the register maintained by the Registrar of Births & Deaths. According to the petitioner his son was born on 17.3.1986 at Lourdes Hospital, Ramankary. Petitioner's son's date of birth has been correctly entered in the Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC), Election Identity Card issued by the Election Commission of India, PAN Card issued by the Income Tax Department, Passport as well as the Baptism certificate issued by the Archdiocese, Changanassery. But that, the date of birth of the petitioner's son was erroneously shown in the register maintained st - by the Register of Births & Deaths of the 1 respondent Panchayath as 31.3.1986. Ext.P-6 is the birth certificate issued in that regard by the ::2:: W.P(C).No.1747 Of 2018 1st respondent. The petitioner's son is now residing in United States of America in connection with his temporary employment and for the purpose of securing permanent job in that foreign country, the authorities of the foreign country is insisting for submitting the birth certificate issued by the statutory authorities concerned. But that, as Ext.P-6 birth certificate issued by the 1st respondent has erroneously shown the date of birth as 31.3.1986, which is in variance with all the other entries in the S.S.L.C Book, Passport, PAN Card, Election Identity Card, etc., the said authorities would seriously object to the acceptability of the materials produced by the petitioner's son. Accordingly, the petitioner's son was advised to submit an application before the competent authority of respondents 1 & 2 so as to ensure that entry in Ext.P-6 birth certificate is corrected so as to show correct date of birth as 17.3.1986 instead of 31.3.1986. But that the authorities concerned had not accepted the said application on the ground that there is no provision contained in the Registration of Births & Deaths Act, 1969, and the Rules framed thereunder for effecting such correction. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition (Civil) with the following prayers: - “i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to accept the application for ::3:: W.P(C).No.1747 Of 2018 correction of date of birth of the petitioner's son Bibin Joseph and do the necessary correction of date of birth within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. - ii. Issue such other writ, order or direction which this Honourable Court deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard Smt.V.Bhavana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the 3rd respondent. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this Writ Petition, notice to respondents 1 & 2 will stand dispensed with. 3. The issue as to whether the statutory authority like Registrar of Births & Deaths has the power to correct an entry like the date of birth issued by such authority is no longer res integra and covered by a series of decisions of this Court as in Sivanandan v. Registrar of Births & Deaths , reported in 2007 (3) KLT 721, Varghese v. Director of Panchayat , reported in 2008 (2) KLT 278, Chalakudy Municipality v. Malavika , reported in 2009 (4) KLT 714 (DB), Johnson v. Registrar of Births & Deaths , reported in 2017 (2) KLT 577. It has been held in those decisions that there are provisions contained in the above Act and Rules as in Sec.15 of the Act and Rule 11 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999. It has also been held that even if any of the contingencies envisaged in Sec.15 and Rule 11 are not satisfied in a ::4:: W.P(C).No.1747 Of 2018 given case, still the statutory authorities have the power to correct a mistake, if it is shown that the plea in this regard is bonafide and reasonable and in such situation, the authority will have to act in terms of justice, equity, good conscience, etc. In the aforecited decision in Johnson v. Registrar of Births & Deaths , reported in 2017 (2) KLT 577, this Court has specifically dealt with a case relating to an application for correction of date of birth as entered in the register of Registrar of Births & Deaths. It was held in para 4 thereof that the Registrar has adequate power to correct any error or entry without any alteration of the original entry by making a suitable entry in the margin and also sign the marginal entry. It will be profitable to refer to para 4 of the judgment in Johnson's case (supra) which reads as follows: “4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I find that as per the provisions of S.15 of The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, the Registrar has the power to correct any error or entry without any alteration of the original entry by making a suitable entry in the margin and also sign the marginal entry. The said power can be exercised by the Registrar, if it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry of the 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. The provisions of the Kerala Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 and in particular R.11 thereof, also speak of the corrections of an entry in the register of birth and death. In the light of the peculiar situation that prevailed during the period from 2000 to 2007, I am of the view that the Writ Petition can be allowed, by directing the 1st respondent to effect the necessary corrections in Exts.P1 and P2 birth certificates, issued in relation to the petitioner's daughters, by incorporating therein the address and permanent address of the parents of ::5:: W.P(C).No.1747 Of 2018 the children in question, at the time of birth of the children, and issue fresh birth certificates in lieu of Exts.P1 and P2, to the petitioner. The 1st respondent shall do the needful to ensure that fresh birth certificates in lieu of Exts.P1 and P2, containing the necessary details, are furnished to the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition together with a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for further action.” 4. Accordingly, it is ordered that necessary application may be submitted by the petitioner's son before the Registrar of Births & Deaths of the 1st respondent-Panchayat seeking the plea of correction of date of birth as entered in Ext.P-6 birth certificate along with supporting documents. As the petitioner's son is now in United States of America, the petitioner may submit the application on behalf of his son on the basis of Ext.P-7 power of attorney. An attested photocopy of the power of attorney may be produced along with the application subject to the condition that the petitioner should make available the original of the power of attorney for perusal and verification of the 1st respondent authorities, who after such verification may return the original of the power of attorney to the petitioner. Necessary affidavits of 2 respective persons in the locality and any other materials including those based on by Exts.P-1 to P-5 may also be placed for the consideration of the Registrar of Births & Deaths of the 1st respondent-Panchayath for his ::6:: W.P(C).No.1747 Of 2018 consideration. Affidavits may also be filed by the petitioner and his wife (parents of the applicant) to explain about the details of the birth of the applicant and as to how the mistake had occurred in the entry in Ext.P-6 certificate, etc. The Registrar of Births & Deaths may conduct a proper enquiry in the matter and may decide the matter in the light of the legal principles laid down by this Court in the aforecited judgments. A decision in this regard should be rendered by the Registrar of Births & Deaths without much delay, within a period of 2 months from the date of submission of the application that may be preferred on behalf of the son along with a certified copy of this judgment. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of. Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge. Bkn/- // True copy // P.A to Judge.