Pretheesh Jose v. Registrar of Births and Deaths, Vathikudy Grama Panchayath; Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Chithirapuram

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN** **MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/7TH KARTHIKA 1934** ## **WP(C).No. 18372 of 2012 (V)** **---------------------------** **PETITIONER(S):** **-------------** **PRETHEESH JOSE, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.M.C.JOSE, MANNARAMATTATHU HOUSE, VILAVOORKAL MALAYINKIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPUAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS.SMT.SHAMEENA SALAHUDHEEN SRI.JACOB E SIMON** **RESPONDENT(S):** **--------------** **1. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS VATHIKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MURIKASSERY P.O. IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 604.** **2. THE MEDICAL OFFICER PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, CHITHIRAPURAM IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 565.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER S.JAMAL** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).No. 18372 of 2012 (V)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS EXHIBITS** - **P1 COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE REGISTER OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS MAINTAINED BY THE RESPONDENT SHOWING THE ENTRY REGARDING THE PETITIONERS BIRTH.** - **P2 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 21-11-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT** - **P3 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER, CHITHIRAPURAM PRIMARY HEALTH CENTER DATED 11-11-2011** - **P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-01-2012 IN W.P.C. NO.1083/2012 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT** - **P5 COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 13-4-2012 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.** ## **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS** ## **NIL** ## **TRUE COPY** **P.A. TO JUDGE** ## **SMM** ## **K.SURENDRA MOHAN,J. --------------------------------------------WP(C).No.18372 of 2012** ## **---------------------------------------------Dated this the 29[th] day of October, 2012** ## **J U D G M E N T** The petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the first respondent. According to the petitioner, he was born on 25.05.1990. But, due to some mistake committed by the person who was maintaining the Birth Register, his date of birth is entered in the Register as 07.08.1990. However, for all purposes his date of birth was taken to be 25.05.1990. Therefore, his Baptism certificate, SSLC book and all other records show his date of birth as 25.05.1990. According to the petitioner, he was not aware of the mistake committed in the Birth Register and the said fact came to his notice only now. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for the correction of the entry in the Birth Register. The request of the petitioner was considered by the first respondent and has been rejected by Ext.P5. W.P.(C)No.18372 of 2012 : 2 : 2. According to Smt. Shameena Salahudheen, who appears for the petitioner Ext.P5 has omitted to consider the crucial question that arose for consideration. The petitioner had produced a certificate to the effect that his mother had undertaken a Lapro sterilization operation on 25.06.1990. On the basis of the said certificate, it is contended that there was no possibility of his mother giving birth to him on 07.08.1990. However, the first respondent has held that the certificate Ext.P3 cannot be considered to be an authentic record to effect correction of the Date of Birth of a person in the Birth Register. Therefore Ext.P5 has been issued. The petitioner seeks the issue of appropriate orders setting aside Ext.P5. 3. I have heard the counsel at length and also perused the records. 4. Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, confers power on the first respondent to correct an entry in the Birth Register, if it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that an entry is W.P.(C)No.18372 of 2012 : 3 : ## erroneous in form or substance. 5. Rule 11 of the The Kerala Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 ('the Rules' for short) reads as follows:- **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. (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. (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. (4) If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry in the register of births and deaths has W.P.(C)No.18372 of 2012 : 4 : 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. (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. 6. Rule 11 extracted above, stipulates the procedure that should be followed for effecting corrections in the Register of Births. The procedure stipulated by the above Rule does not appear to have been adopted before issuing Ext.P5. On an interpretation of Rule 11, a Division Bench of this Court has held in **Registrar of Births and Deaths v. Pathrose [2007(2) KLT 358]** that information from two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case would also have to be obtained. K.S.Radhakrishnan Ag.C.J. (as he then was) has summed up the position in paragraph 5 of the said judgment as follows: We are of the view in a case where application is W.P.(C)No.18372 of 2012 : 5 : preferred seeking correction of date of birth the rule which is applicable is not sub-r.(4) of R.11. When a person asserts that any entry in the register of births and deaths is erroneous in substance the provision which is applicable is sub-r.(2) of R.11. If any person asserts that any entry in the register of births and deaths is erroneous in substance, he has to submit a declaration setting forth the nature of the error and also to establish his case by furnishing true facts of the case made by two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case. The Registrar may then carry out the correction in the date of birth in the manner prescribed in S.15 read with sub-r.(2) of R.11. Sub-r.(1) of R.11 deals with correction or cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths. Sub-r.(4) of R.11 states that if the Registrar is satisfied that any entry in the register of births and deaths has been fraudulently or improperly made the Chief Registrar can take action in the matter. 7. The petitioner has produced various other documents in addition to Ext.P3 certificate, including his SSLC Book. However, the said documents have also not been considered in issuing Ext.P5. For the above reasons, Ext.P5 is set aside. The first respondent is directed to reconsider the matter and to issue fresh orders in accordance with Rule 11 of the Rules and the decision of this Court referred to above. W.P.(C)No.18372 of 2012 : 6 : Appropriate orders shall be issued in the matter, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- **K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE** kkj