KULWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KULWANT Singh son of Ram Singh has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying that a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the order dated 15.5.2000, Annexure P-4, with a further prayed that directions be issued to respondent No. 2, i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar, to countersign the marriage certificate, Annexure P-1, which was issued by the Registrar of Marriages, as per the instructions of the Govt. dated 22.2.1989.

(2.) THE case set up by the petitioner is that he was married with Hanga Giselinda Hilda as per Sikh rites on 4.11.1999. The marriage was valid, as it fulfilled all the requirements of section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Before submitting any certificate issued by any competent authority to the foreign embassy/High Commission based in India, it is mandatory that the same should be counter signed by Legalisation Department of the Govt. of India situated at Patiala House, New Delhi. The said department certifies the documents to be genuine only if it is countersigned by the concerned State Govt. The State of Punjab had issued instruction No. 13/1/78-OIC(1)/90-101 dated 22.2.1989, directing to the Deputy Commissioners appointed in various districts of the State of countersign the various kinds of certificates detailed in the instructions, which includes the certificate of marriage so that the same could be countersigned by the Govt. of Punjab with purpose of sending it to the Govt. of India. The petitioner was married Hanga Giselinda Hilda and the marriage was registered on 19.11.1999 in the office of the Registrar of Marriages, the petitioner submitted the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar to the Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar, for counter signatures on 22.11.1999. The petitioner had been visiting the office of respondent No. 2 for countersignatures but to no effect. Ultimately, he had to file a writ petition No. 3741 of 2000 in this Court and directions were given by the High Court to respondent No. 2 to dispose of the representation made by the petitioner. In pursuance of the orders, respondent No. 2 passed the order, Annexure P-4, vide which he declined to counter sign the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar of Marriages. Hence, the present petition.

(3.) WE have heard the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case.