SUKUMAR MEHTA Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR BIRTHS AND DEATHS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is father of minor child whose birth was registered on 7/08/1989. At the time of registration in the register kept under the provisions of Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, name of the minor child was stated to be 'SUCHI'. Said child was born on 6/08/1989 and the birth was registered on 7/08/1989.

(2.) Thereafter the parents of the child decided to change the name of the minor female child from 'SUCHI' to 'PRACHF. An application was, therefore, submitted along with affidavit to the District Registrar for effecting the change in the name of the child in the said entry from SUCHI to 'PRACHI'. Along with the said application the original birth certificate was a] also produced. After receiving said application they have failed to pass any order thereon and it is such an inaction on the part of respondent-authorities which is under challenge in this petition.

(3.) On Rule Nisi being issued by this Court, Mr. D. K. Trivedi, learned G. P. has appeared on behalf of respondents. In his submission, under the provisions of Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, there is no power in the Registrar to correct the entry already made in the Register of Births. In this connection, Mr. Trivedi has invited the attention of this Court to various provisions of the Act, and more particularly, Sees 14 and 15 of the said Act. Section 14 of the said Act deals with registration, of name of a child. When the birth of any child is registered Without any name, parent or guardian of said child shall within the prescribed period give information regarding the name of the child to the Registrar either orally or in writing and thereupon the Registrar shall enter such ram:: in the Register and initial and date the entry. By this provision impliedly the Registrar is authorised to correct the entry already made in the Register by placing name of the child on an application being made by the parent or guardian of said child. This power is, undoubtedly a limited power inasmuch as the first part of Section refers to the contingency when the birth of any child has been registered without name. In such a contingency there is, no doubt, power in the Registrar to enter the name of the child on application being made by the parent or guardian of the child and to accordingly correct the entry in the Birth Register. Section 15 of the said Act deals with correction or cancellation of entry in the Birth Register. However, power given under Sec. 15 is, once again, limited power. When an entry in a Birth Register is found to be erroneous in form or in substance or has been factually or improperly made, he has been empowered to correct or cancel such an entry. In view of the specification of circumstances where an entry already made can be corrected under Sec. 15 it cannot be said that the present case would be governed by Sec. 15. In case where the birth of child has been registered without the name, then name can be inserted in the register on the application of the parent or guardian of the child. The said power can be legitimately extended to the power to correct the name of the child on the application of parent or guardian of the child. If there is power in tile Registrar to enter the name of child subsequently on the request of parent or guardian there is power also in the Registrar to change the name of child at the request of parent or guardian. In my opinion, it is not the case of total absence of power in Registrar and application of the petitioner could have been entertained by the Registrar for change of name of child from "SUCHI" to "PRACHI". It is further required to be noted that the application is given by the parent of the child and the same duly affirmed. There is no other person but to have their own choice and there does not appear to be any earthly reason to object to such application. I, therefore, think that this is a fit case where power ought to have been exercised by the Registrar under See. 14 read with Sec. 15 by entertaining the application of the petitioner and by correcting the name of the minor female child of the petitioner from that "SUCHI" to "PRACHI".