Gujarat High Court High Court

Patel vs Mamlatdar on 15 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Patel vs Mamlatdar on 15 November, 2011
Author: K.A.Puj,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/3379/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3379 of 2009
 

 
=========================================================


 

PATEL
BALDEVBHAI DAHYABHAI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

MAMLATDAR
- Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
VIRENDRA BAHETI for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR AMIT
P. PATEL, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE
SERVED for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 01/05/2009 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

The
petitioner has filed petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking direction to the respondent authorities for
amendment in the Birth Date of the petitioner in the Birth
Certificate from 16.08.1953 to 01.06.1953. The petitioner’s Birth
date is mentioned in the Birth Certificate as 16.08.1953 whereas in
the School Leaving Certificate it is mentioned as 01.06.1953. The
petitioner has therefore filed petition seeking amendment in the
Birth Certificate issued by the Mamlatdar, Taluka Dascroi, District
Ahmedabad. Here there is difference in two documents with regard to
the birth date of the petitioner. The Birth Certificate shows a
different date and School Leaving Certificate shows a different
date. Which date is correct can be decided only after bringing
evidence and for that purpose, the petitioner has either to approach
the Civil Court or the Court of the learned J.M.F.C. This Court
cannot decide this issue while exercising its writ jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

This
petition is therefore disposed of reserving the liberty to the
petitioner either to approach the competent Civil Court or the Court
of the learned J.M.F.C. for appropriate relief in the matter.

(K.A.

Puj, J.)

Caroline

   

Top