IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.32324/2018 (LB-BMP) Between:
Smt.Ratnamma, W/o late Basavaraju Aged about 48 years, R/at No.168/B, 6th Cross, 2nd Main Road, Timber Yard, Bengaluru-560 026. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Ramachandra R.Naik, Advocate) And:
1. The Bengaluru Bruhat Mahanagar Palike Hudson Circle, Bengaluru-560 002. Rep.by its Commissioner 2. Health Officer, South Region, BBMP, Circle Office, 9th Main Road, 9th Cross, BBMP, Jayanagar 2nd Block, Bengaluru-560 011.
3. The Registrar of Births and Deaths, Office of the BBMP Statics Division, 1st Floor, Commerce Complex behind, Upparpete Police Station, Tank Bund Road, Bangalore-560 009.
... Respondents (By Sri. H.Devendrappa, Advocate for R1 and R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned endorsement dated 24.07.2017 issued by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-D.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Petitioner has filed the present writ seeking for issuance of appropriate writ or order in the nature of certiorari to quash the endorsement at Annexure-D issued by the respondent No.2 and sought for issuance of an appropriate writ or order in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to issue a death certificate with correct details of the father-in-law of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner states that her husband Sri Basavaraju died on 05.12.2016 and was cremated in Bengaluru and the report from the burial ground issued by the BBMP is produced as per Annexure-A.
3. Petitioner states that an application was submitted to the respondent No.2 to issue a copy of death certificate of her husband Sri Basavaraju. It is further stated that in the application submitted, the correct details including that of father of the deceased was furnished to the respondent-BBMP. It is stated that the death certificate came to be issued and copy of the same obtained by the petitioner is produced at Annexure-B. The petitioner states that in the death certificate that was obtained, it is found that at column-6 of the death certificate, the name of the deceased father-in-law of the petitioner is mentioned as late Linge Gowda. Further, the petitioner states that name of the father of her deceased husband is Madegowda. The petitioner states that an endorsement came to be issued at Annexure-D as regards representation of the petitioner for rectification. In the copy of the said endorsement produced at Annexure-D dated 24.07.2017, it is stated as follows:-
“©) ªÀÄgÀt ¥æÀªÀiÁt¥ÀvæÀ: ªÀÄÈvÀgÀ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ ªÀÄÆ® ¸ÀégÀÆ¥À wzÀÄÝ¥Àr ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ¸ÁzsÀå«®èªÉAzÀÄ w½¹zÉ.”
4. Petitioner states that she had submitted an affidavit dated 29.05.2018 sworn to by the petitioner pointing out the correct description of her father-in-law that is to be incorporated in the records maintained by the respondent-BBMP. The affidavit is accompanied with the documents including the Aadhar Card issued by Unique Identification Authority of India wherein, name of the father-in-law has mentioned as Madegowda. The petitioner states that other documents including the sale deed dated 06.06.2012 which is registered document wherein, the name of husband of the petitioner is mentioned as Basavaraju and petitioner has also enclosed a copy of the record of rights relating to the property belonging to the petitioner’s husband, which mentions the name of the petitioner’s husband as Basavaraju and the name of petitioner’s father-in-law as Madegowda. The petitioner states that despite furnishing of the affidavit and repeated reminders, no action has been taken by the respondent- Authorities to correct the mistake that has crept in the death certificate. Petitioner states that subsequent to the endorsement dated 14.07.2017, a fresh application has been given furnishing the correct details as regards father- in-law of the petitioner.
5. It is to be noticed that under Section 15 of the Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (‘the Act’ for short) provides that, if the Registrar is satisfied that any entry of birth or death in any register kept by him under this Act is erroneous in form or substance, he may, subject to Rules correct the error and make necessary entry as provided for.
6. Under the Rules i.e Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths Rules 1999, (the Rules’ for short) Rule- 11 also provides that if clerical or formal error is brought to the notice of the Registrar, the Registrar shall enquire into the matter and if he is satisfied that any such error is made, he can correct the said error and send a extract to the appropriate authorities after correction as detailed in Rule-11.
7. In the present case, the mistake in the entry made in column-6 as regards name of the father of the deceased being an ancillary entry vis-à-vis the main entry is that which could be corrected. The error is one that could be corrected pursuant to the power conferred under Section 15 of the Act read with Rule 11 as the said error is one relating to form and substance.
8. The affidavit of the petitioner at Annexure-E, along with documents, with a fresh representation to be made by the petitioner to the Health Officer (respondent No.2) to be forwarded to the Registrar of Births and Deaths reserving liberty to the Registrar to enquire into the matter after taking note of the facts as made out.
9. Respondent No.3 is directed to enquire into the matter as provided for under Section 15 the Act and Rule 11 of the Rules and take necessary action on the material placed before him. The petitioner to co-operate in the enquiry that is to be made by the respondent-Authorities and furnish such other documents as may be required by the Registrar to come to the conclusion that an error has been made which could be corrected by exercising power conferred under Section 15 of Act read with Rule 11 the Rules. The said consideration is to be completed within a period of six weeks from the date necessary records are submitted to the Registrar, respondent No.3.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of, subject to the above observations.
Sd/- JUDGE SB/-