High Court of Karnataka Allows Parents' Writ Petition for Correction of Misspelled Names in Birth Certificate — BBMP Directed to Reconsider Representation. Court Held That Authorities Must Consider Representation and Pass Speaking Order Within Four Weeks Under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 64
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Sanjib Das and Bina Das, are the parents of a child named Deep Das, who was born on 01.10.2008 at Vani Vilas Hospital. Upon application, a birth certificate was issued on 28.10.2008, but the names of the parents were misspelled: the father's name was entered as 'Sandeep Das' instead of 'Sanjib Das', and the mother's name as 'Beena Das' instead of 'Bina Das'. The petitioners noticed the error and made a representation on 18.05.2018 to the Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike (BBMP), seeking correction. However, the Commissioner passed an order on 12.07.2018 rejecting the request. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka, praying to quash the order dated 12.07.2018 and to direct the respondents to rectify the register of births by entering the correct names. The court observed that the respondent authorities ought to have considered the representation and passed appropriate orders. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the court disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation afresh and pass a speaking order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The court also directed that the petitioners be afforded an opportunity of hearing before passing the order.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of Constitution of India - Correction of Birth Register - Petitioners sought correction of misspelled names in birth certificate - Court held that the respondent authorities ought to have considered the representation and passed appropriate orders, and directed them to do so within a stipulated time frame (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the respondent authorities are bound to correct the misspelled names of the parents in the birth certificate upon a representation made by the petitioners.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is disposed of. The respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 18.05.2018 afresh and pass a speaking order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

Law Points

  • Correction of entries in register of births
  • Article 226 of Constitution of India
  • Representation to statutory authority
  • Duty of authorities to rectify clerical errors
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (KAR) (03) 7

Writ Petition No.38423/2018 (LB-BMP)

2019-03-07

S. Sunil Dutt Yadav

Sanjay Gowda N.S. for petitioners, Ashwin S. Halady for respondents

Sanjib Das and Bina Das

The Commissioner, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike and The Registrar of Births & Deaths

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking correction of misspelled names in a birth certificate.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of order dated 12.07.2018 passed by the Commissioner, BBMP, and direction to rectify the register of births by entering the correct names of the petitioners.

Filing Reason

The petitioners' names were misspelled in the birth certificate of their child; their representation for correction was rejected by the Commissioner.

Previous Decisions

The Commissioner, BBMP, passed an order on 12.07.2018 rejecting the petitioners' representation for correction of names.

Issues

Whether the respondent authorities are bound to correct the misspelled names in the birth certificate upon a representation made by the petitioners.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that their names were misspelled in the birth certificate and that they made a representation for correction, which was rejected without proper consideration.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent authorities ought to have considered the representation of the petitioners and passed appropriate orders. The court directed reconsideration without expressing opinion on merits.

Judgment Excerpts

The respondent authorities ought to have considered the representation and passed appropriate orders. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 18.05.2018 afresh and pass a speaking order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Procedural History

The petitioners made a representation on 18.05.2018 to the Commissioner, BBMP, seeking correction of names in the birth certificate. The Commissioner passed an order on 12.07.2018 rejecting the representation. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date. The petition came up for preliminary hearing on 07.03.2019 and was disposed of.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Parents' Writ Petition for Correction of Misspelled Names in Birth Certificate — BBMP Directed to Reconsider Representation. Court Held That Authorities Must Consider Representation and Pass Speaking Order Within Four...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Restoration of First Appeal Dismissed in Default, Emphasizes Liberal Construction of Procedural Law to Advance Substantial Justice. The Court held that an order refusing to readmit an appeal under Order 41 Rule 19 CPC is appealab...