Swapna Jambhekar v. The Corporation of Cochin and others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **SWAPNA JAMBHEKAR AGED 47 YEARS D/O. VIKAS JAMBHEKAR, JALAVAYU VIHAR, A-8-3, PANAMPILLY NAGAR P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 036 BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN**| |---|---| ||**OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN,**| ||**ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 011,**| ||**REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY**| |**2**|**THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATH**| ||**OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN ,**| ||**ERNAKULAM PIN 682 011**| |**3**|**THE SUB REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATH,**| ||**OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN,**| ||**ERNAKULAM PIN 682 011**| ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SRI.S.SUDHEESH KUMAR,SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ::2:: **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J** . ----------------------------W.P(C).No.10743 Of 2020 --------------------------------Dated this the 2[nd] day of June, 2020. ## **J U D G M E N T** The case set up in this Writ Petition (Civil) is as follows: The petitioner, the wife of ' _Amoga Warhadpande_ ' an Indian Navy Officer, now seeks appropriate correction in the ' _name of mother_ ' in ' _birth certificate_ ' of her minor child, ' _Angad Amogh Warhad pande_ ' issued by the 2[nd] respondent. In the present ' _birth certificate_ ' in hand already issued by the 2[nd] respondent mistakenly noted the name of the mother of minor child as ' _Swapna warhadpande_ ' instead of ' _Swapna Jambhekar_ '. For appropriate correction in the ' _birth certificate_ ' she submitted Exhibit P1 application before the 2[nd] respondent on 20/05/2020. At the time of submission of application, the said respondent initially was not ready to accept the said application and after her insistence the said authority accept the application stating that the said authority is not ready to issue the certificate as she prayed due to the reason that her school leaving certificate is not in consonance with her demand. For proving her bona fides, she submitted the election identity card, Adhar card, Certificate from 2 respected persons and ::3:: ## **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** one & same certificates before the 2[nd] respondent for proper timely consideration of Exhibit P1 and which is now under pending consideration. The petitioner's husband got transferred to Bangalore and she also intend to join with her husband immediately after the lockdown days. She required corrected birth certificate of her child for admitting the child in a school at Bangalore. If the 2[nd] respondent rejects the application, which will adversely affect the petitioner and which will also spoil the life of her minor child. It is in the light of these factual averments, that the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition seeking the following reliefs: - _“I. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the 2[nd] respondent to consider Exhibit P1 application to make appropriate correction in the name of the mother of the minor child in the birth certificate as 'Swapna Jambhekar' instead of 'Swapna warhadpande' in the light of the dictum laid down in 2009 (4) KLT 714 and the judgment in W.P(C).No.5446/2019._ - _II. To declare that the petitioner is entitled to have a corrected birth certificate of her minor child 'Angad Amogh warhadpande' in the column of mother as 'Swapna Jambhekar' instead of 'Swapna warhadpande' within a short span of time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court, based on the 'Election identity card', 'Adhar card' and the 'One and same certificates' issued by the Elamkulam village officer, in the interest of justice._ _III. Issue such other appropriate writ, order or directions as this Hon'ble court may deem just and proper to issue in the facts and the circumstances in the case.”_ ## 2. Heard C.R.Sivakumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.S.Sudhish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for Cochin Corporation appearing for the respondents. ::4:: **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** 3. According to the petitioner she had given birth to a female child on 23.9.2010 and birth of the child has been duly registered in accordance with the provisions contained in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 and the Rules framed thereunder by the 2[nd] respondent-Registrar of Births and Deaths, attached to the Office of the Cochin Municipal Corporation. But that, the name of the mother of the child has been erroneously shown therein. The petitioner being the mother and guardian of the child has now filed Ext.P-1 application dated 21.5.2020 with all requisite supporting documents seeking for orders of the 2[nd] respondent-notified Registrar of Births and Deaths so as to correct the name of the mother of the child as entered in the birth certificate. The petitioner would submit that as a matter of fact, she had endeavoured to move the the 2[nd] respondent earlier, but since the 2[nd] respondent-Office was insisting on various documents and supporting documents, etc., it had took some time to collect the documents and to submit Ext.P-1 application. 4. Sri.S.Sudheesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that if Ext.P-1 application dated 21.5.2020 has been duly received with all the supporting documents, etc., then the 2[nd] respondent-Registrar of Births and ::5:: ## **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** Deaths, would consider the same on merits and would pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 5. The issue as to whether statutory authority like the Registrar of Births and Deaths functioning in terms of the provisions contained in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the Rules framed thereunder, has the power to correct the entry like the name, date of birth, etc., in such birth certificate issued by the Registrar is not 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, _**Mathew Alex v. Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath**_ **,** reported in 2018 (3) KLT 126, etc. This Court has held that the statutory Registrar has powers to consider the plea for correction not only in respect of the explicit scenarios covered by Sec.15 and Rule 11 but also in respect of factual scenarios which are not explicitly covered by such statutory provisions. Further that in cases where the pleas made for correction of change of ::6:: **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** name, etc., are not covered by explicit scenarios covered by Sec.15 and Rule 11, the most important aspect to be examined is as to whether the said plea is bonafide and has not been made for any ulterior and extraneous motives and the statutory public authority is bound to act in terms of justice, equity and good conscience and to follow the principles of natural justice for the exercise of such statutory discretionary powers. 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 and para 4 of the said judgment in _**Johnson's**_ case (supra) 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 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.”_ ::7:: ## **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 2[nd] respondent-Registrar of Births and Deaths will take up the matters raised by the petitioner in Ext.P-1 application and after condcuting appropriate enquiry and after ensuring that copy of the enquiry report, if any, is given to the petitioner in advance and should thereafter on giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner either in person or through authorised representative/counsel, if any, would take a decision without much delay, preferably within aperiod of 2 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this judgment and a copy of the memorandum of Writ Petition along with all the exhibits before the 2[nd] respondent for necessary information and further action. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of. **Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.** bkn/- ::8:: **WP(C).No.10743 OF 2020(P)** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH ACKNOLEDGEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 21/05/2020**