SHASHIKALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

(2.) When the matter is taken up for hearing, even in the fifth round, Mr. Chirag B. Upadhyay, learned counsel representing the petitioner has not remained present and since matter being of the year 2017, the Court is constrained to taken up for its disposal in view of the innocuous relief which is prayed in the petition.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that elder son namely, Anshusingh Pratapsingh Rajput was born on 4/5/2000 at Janta Hospital, Surat and younger son named Prithvirajsingh Pratapsingh Rajput was born on 17/10/2006 at Vatsalya Hospital, Surat respectively. The name of Anshusingh was registered with Surat Municipal Corporation being Registration No. CZ/2000/5801 on 12/5/2000 and name of Prithvirajsingh was registered with Surat Municipal Corporation being Registration No. SEZ/2006/4125. According to the petitioner, the name of the mother in the aforesaid certificate was wrongly mentioned as "Binuben" instead of "Shashikala". The petitioner accordingly on 28/9/2016 sworn an affidavit for seeking change of name of mother from "Binuben" to "Shashikala". But despite said application having been submitted before the authority, till date of filing of the petition, no decision was taken, which has constrained the petitioner to approach this Court for seeking the aforesaid relief as stated herein-above.