PATEL DIPIKABEN RAJESHBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Mr.P.P.Banaji, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2, TalaticumMantri, Pansar Gram Panchayat, Taluka Kalol, District Gandhinagar, has been served as far back as on 24.07.2014, but has not chosen to put in an appearance before this Court, till date. As it appears that the said respondent is not interested in contesting the petition, it is being heard and decided in his absence, with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

(2.) THIS petition under Article226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred, with a prayer to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 22.04.2014, passed by respondent No.2, wherein the said respondent has refused to exercise the power vested in him under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 ("the Act", for short), in order to correct the date of birth of the petitioner.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioner that she was born on 27.09.1967 at Mouje Pansar, Taluka Kalol. Her name and the particulars of her birth were recorded in the Register of Births and Deaths maintained by respondent No.2. However, due to a bonafide error, the date of birth of the petitioner has been wrongly recorded as 27.10.1969. Another discrepancy in the record of Births and Deaths in respect of the petitioner is that her name has been wrongly recorded as "Bebi" and her mother's name has not been recorded at all. The name of the petitioner is "Dipikaben" and her mother's name is "Shardaben". The petitioner is in possession of a School Leaving Certificate and Passport, wherein her correct date of birth, that is, 27.09.1967 and name, Dipikaben, have been recorded. The petitioner is also in possession of a PAN Card, Driving Licence, Election Card and Adhar Card, where such details have been correctly recorded. In view of the said discrepancies, the petitioner made an application to respondent No.2 on 22.04.2014, under Section15 of the Act. The said respondent has rejected the application of the petitioner by passing the impugned order, giving rise to the filing of the present petition.