Viju Gopalakrishna Panicker vs The State Of Kerala on 20 February, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5230 of 2009(W)


1. VIJU GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER,37,TECHNICAL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE BIRTH AND DEATH CHIEF REGISTRAR,

3. TRIPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY,

4. THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :20/02/2009

 O R D E R
                             S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
                      ==================
                        W.P(C).No.5230 OF 2009
                      ==================
               Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009
                             J U D G M E N T

The petitioner’s name is entered in the birth register maintained

by the 4th respondent as “Panicker Viju Gopalkrishna”. According to the

petitioner, his name as given in the passport is “Viju Gopalakrishna

Panicker”. The petitioner’s application before the 4th respondent for

correction of his name as “Viju Gopalakrishna Panicker” is not being

considered by the 4th respondent, is the grievance of the petitioner.

Therefore, the petitioner seeks a direction to the 4th respondent to

correct the name of the petitioner as “Viju Gopalakrishna Panicker”

and to issue a certified extract of the birth register.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent.

The counsel for the 4th respondent opposes the prayer of the

petitioner. According to the standing counsel, originally the name of

the petitioner was “Vijayakumar”. Subsequently he sought correction

of the same on the basis of SSLC certificate which has been granted.

The same has accordingly been corrected as “Panicker Viju

Gopalakrishna”. The contention of the 4th respondent is that now the

same cannot again be corrected as “Viju Gopalakrishna Panicker” on

the basis of the passport.

3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

4. The two names themselves abundantly make it clear that

essentially there is no difference. It is only a rearrangement of the

2

name. Gopalakrishna Panicker is the name of the father of the

petitioner and the name of the petitioner is “Viju”. Normally in Kerala

parlance, there is a practice of adding the name of the father after the

name of a person which only has been done in the passport. Now the

petitioner is facing difficulties because the name in the passport differs

with the name in the birth certificate. Section 15 of the Kerala

Registration of Births and Deaths Act permits such correction. In fact

this Court has in the decisions in Varghese v. Director of

Panchayat [2008 (2) KLT 278] and Registrar of Births and Deaths

v. Pathrose [2007 (2) KLT 358] also held that such corrections are

permissible. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that the 4th

respondent can be directed to correct the name of the petitioner in the

birth register as requested for by the petitioner. Accordingly, I direct

the 4th respondent to make appropriate corrections in the birth

register and issue a birth certificate to the petitioner in the correct

name, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from

the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. If the

petitioner makes an appropriate application for correction of the name

of the mother also, the same shall also be considered and disposed of

by the 4th respondent in accordance with the above judgments, within

two weeks from the date of receipt of the application.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

sdk+                                              S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
         ///True copy///

                                P.A. to Judge

3