1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution of India as well as under the provisions of the Registration of Birth and Deaths Registration Act, 1969 and under the provisions of the Gujarat Registration of Births Deaths Rules, 2004 seeking prayer of directing the respondents to replace the names of the petitioner and his wife (adoptive parents) instead of original parents in the birth certificate issued by the respondents Authorities.
2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the petitioner is an adoptive father of a child namely “Jaydeep” and he made an application on 13.5.2011 to the respondent No. 1 Corporation for making necessary changes in the birth certificate by giving the details of adoptive parents and residential address of adoptive parents. It is required to be mentioned that the petitioner and his wife had no issue for long lapse of years of their marriage and therefore, they decided to adopt a child from their family and by mutual consent, they have decided to adopt “Jaydeep”, son of brother of the petitioner namely Kanjibhai and Champaben Kanjibhai Solanki. The petitioner and his wife have adopted said child, for which, on 21.8.2010, a registered adoption deed also came to be executed in respect of adoption of said minor Jaydeep. The petitioner published an advertisement regarding change of name and address of minor son published at Sr. No.151 in the Gazette of Gujarat dated 16.9.2010. The application made by the petitioner on 13.5.2011 was rejected by the respondent No.1 Corporation on 23.12.2011 on the ground that as per letter dated 4.11.1999, the petitioner is required to produce order passed by the competent Court regarding change of name of parents of adoptive child in birth certificate. Therefore, the petitioner has instituted Criminal Misc. Application No.50 of 2012 before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (Municipal), Rajkot and same was rejected by the learned Magistrate on 23.4.2012. However, the application was preferred by the petitioner was not considered by the respondent Authority. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under the provisions of The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (“the Act” for short) and The Gujarat Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2004, the authority has power to make correction in the record and therefore erroneously rejected his application.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Lalakiya for Corporation – respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned advocate for the petitioner and submitted that the order passed by the respondent Authority is just and proper and no interference is required to be called for by this Court. He submitted that respondent Corporation does not have the power to change the name of adoptive parents directly as the same is required to be done after leading evidence before the appropriate Court. He submitted that this petition deserves to be rejected.
5. Heard learned AGP Mr. Vyas for the State.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned advocates appearing of the parties. I have perused the memo of the petition, affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondent No.1, provisions of the Act as well as Rules and cases cited by the learned advocate for the petitioner.
7. Section 15 of the Act, the Registrar has power for correction or cancellation of entry in the Register of Births and Deaths Act,1969. Section 15 of the Act reads as under:
“15. Correction or cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths – If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry of a birth or death in any register kept by him under this Act is erroneous in form or substance, or has been fraudulently or improperly made, he may, subject to such rules as may be made by the State Government with respect to the conditions on which and the circumstances in which such entries may be corrected or cancelled, correct the error or cancel the entry by suitable entry in the margin, without any alteration of the original entry, and shall sign the marginal entry and add thereto the date of the correction or cancellation.”
8. Rule 11 of the Gujarat Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2004 relates to correction or cancellation of entry in the Register of Births and Deaths, reads as under:
(1) If it is reported to the Register that a clerical or formal error has been made in the register or if such error is otherwise noticed by him and if the register is in his possession, the Registrar shall inquire into the matter and if he is satisfied that any such error has been made, he shall correct the error (by correcting or cancelling the entry) as provided in Section 15 of the Act and shall send an extract of the entry showing the error and how it has been corrected to the District Registrar of Births and Deaths.
(2) In the case referred to sub rule (1) if the register is not in the possession of the Registrar, he/she shall make a report to the District Registrar of Births and deaths and call for the relevant register and after inquiring into the matter, if he is satisfied that any such error has been made, make the necessary correction.
(3) Any such correction as mentioned in sub rule 2 shall be countersigned by the District Registrar of Births and Deaths when the register is received from the Registrar.
(4) If any person asserts that any entry in the register of births and deaths is erroneous in substance, the Registrar may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under section 15 of the Act upon production by that person a declaration setting forth the nature of the error and true facts of the case made by two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in subrule (1) and subrule (4) the Registrar shall make report of any correction of the kind referred to therein giving necessary details to the District Registrar of Births and Deaths.
(6) If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry in the register of births and deaths has been made fraudulently or improperly, he shall make a report giving necessary details to the officer authorised by the Chief Registrar by general or special order in this behalf under section 25 of the Act and on hearing from him take necessary action in the matter.
(7) In every case in which an entry is corrected or cancelled under this rule, intimation thereof should be sent to the permanent address of the person who has given information under section 8 or section 9 of the Act.”
9. In view of the aforesaid provisions, it is clear that the respondent authorities have power to make corrections in the register of Births and Deaths. It is evident from the record that the petitioner has produced all the necessary evidence on record to show how change in the names in Birth Certificate. If respondent authority comes to conclusion, on the basis of evidence before it, that deed of adoption is true, correct, legal and valid then there is no reason for the concern authority, to deny the correction, in Birth Certificate.
10. The law on the subject is already settled. In the case of Mulla Faizal @ Fazillabanu Suleman Ibrahim V/s. State of Gujarat and others, reported in 2000(2) GLR 1553 it has been held that the Registrar, Births and Deaths has power to correct the entries made in the Register. Further, in the case of Sukumar Mehta V/s. District Registrar, Births and Deaths, reported in 1993(1) GLR 93 and in the case of Vimal M. Patel V/s. State of Gujarat and Another, reported in 2001(3) GLR 2484 the Court has directed the appropriate authority for making necessary correction in the records of birth of the person on production of sufficient documents. This Court while disposing of the petition being Special Civil Application No.6962 of 2002, directed the Authority to make necessary correction in the register concerned. Same direction for making correction in birth certificate was given by this Court also, while deciding Special Civil Application No.6227 of 2007. I have perused the decision in the case of Manoj Omprakash Goes Vs. State of Gujarat through Secretary & Anr. reported in GLR 2011(2) 1734 and same is applicable to the present case.
11. In the premises aforesaid, the petition is allowed. The impugned decision not to correct the names in Birth Certificate is quashed and set aside. The concerned authority shall reconsider the application of the petitioner in view of the provisions of Rule 11 of the Gujarat Registration of Births and Deaths Rules,2004 and Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act,1969 and make necessary corrections in the Birth Certificate as prayed for in the memo of the petition, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of writ of this Court. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. Direct service is permitted.
YNVYAS (Z.K.SAIYED, J.)