Abraham.P.P. vs State Of Kerala on 25 January, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 2309 of 2010(K)


1. ABRAHAM.P.P., PLANTHARA PUTHENPURAYIL,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SALAMMA JACOB, W/O.ABRAHAM P.P.,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS

3. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS,

4. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VINOD J.DEV

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :25/01/2010

 O R D E R
                    ANTONY DOMINIC, J
                        .......................
                      W.P.(C).2309/2010
                        .......................
            Dated this the 25th day of January, 2010

                         JUDGMENT

1. Petitioners’ complaint is that in the register maintained

by respondents 3 and 4, their dates of birth have been

wrongly entered. It is stated that though they made

applications to respondents 3 and 4 seeking correction, the

applications were not accepted and therefore they moved

Exts.P1 and P2 representations before the 2nd respondent. It

is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners

that the 2nd respondent has forwarded Exts.P1 and P2 to

respondents 3 and 4 and that the applications are pending

consideration of respondents 3 and 4.

2. If as stated a mistake has been committed in the entry

regarding the dates of birth of the petitioners, it is open to

the petitioners to seek its correction before the concerned

Registrar of Births and Deaths which insofar as the 1st

petitioner is concerned is the 3rd respondent and insofar the

2nd petitioner is concerned is the 4th respondent. If Exts.P1

and P2 have been received by respondents 3 and 4, they shall

W.P.(C).2309/10
2

take necessary action on such applications. If the said

applications have not been received, it is clarified that it will

be open to the petitioners to make appropriate applications

before the aforesaid respondents in which event respondents

accept the applications and deal with the same in accordance

with law, as expeditiously as possible.

3. Petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along

with the copy of the writ petition before respondents 3 and 4

for compliance.

ANTONY DOMINIC,
Judge

mrcs