Vipul M. Pancholi, J.

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in which, the petitioner has prayed that the respondent authority be directed to carry out the correction in respect of the name of the petitioner as 'Sejalben' instead of 'Manisha' and also mention the surname of the petitioner as 'Patel' in the Birth Certificate/Register as per the documents annexed with the petition and thereby direction be given to the respondent to issue fresh Birth Certificate containing the correct details.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Harish J. Soni for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Asmita Patel for respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mrs. Kalpana K. Raval for respondent No.2.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the correct name of the petitioner is Sejalben. However, through mistake, her name is recorded as 'Manisha' in the Birth Certificate issued by respondent No.2 and the surname of the petitioner i.e. 'Patel' was not mentioned. The petitioner has, therefore, requested respondent No.2 to correct the name of the petitioner and add the surname of the petitioner in the Birth Certificate. However, the request of the petitioner came to be rejected by respondent No.2 by communication/order dated 06.07.2018. Learned advocate referred the said communication/order. It is submitted that respondent No.2, while not entertaining the request of the petitioner, has placed reliance upon the Circular dated 18.02.2016 issued by the Chief Registrar, Births and Deaths and Commissioner (Health), State of Gujarat.

3.1 Learned advocate Mr. Soni has thereafter referred the documentary evidence, namely, School Leaving Certificate, Passport, Election Card, Aadhar Card, PAN Card, APL-1 Card, Certificate of Registration of Marriage and the affidavits of the petitioner and her brother. Relying upon the aforesaid documentary evidence, it is submitted that in all the aforesaid documents, name of the petitioner is correctly recorded as 'Sejalben' and her surname is mentioned as 'Patel' and, therefore, respondent No.2 ought to have considered the said documentary evidence at the time of considering the application submitted by the petitioner.

3.2 Learned advocate Mr. Soni, thereafter, has placed reliance upon the following decisions and orders passed by this Court.

(1) Order dated 10.05.2012 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.497 of 2012

(2) Nitaben Nareshbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat reported in, (2008) 1 GLH 556

(3) Natubhai Dharamdas Patel v. State of Gujarat and others, (2018) AIR Gujarat 92

(4) Order dated 06.06.2017 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.10126 of 2017

(5) Order dated 19.12.2018 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.2004 of 2018.

3.3 Learned advocate Mr. Soni has also referred the provisions contained in Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1969") and the Gujarat Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 2004").

3.4 Relying upon the aforesaid provisions and the decisions rendered by this Court, it is contended that the respondent authority is empowered to correct the name of the concerned applicant on the basis of the documentary evidence produced before it. However, in the present case, the respondent authority has not considered the request of the petitioner and even not looked into the documentary evidence produced by the petitioner and simply, placed reliance upon the Circular dated 18.02.2016 issued by the Chief Registrar, Births and Deaths and Commissioner (Health), State of Gujarat. Learned advocate Mr. Soni has, therefore, urged that communication/order dated 06.07.2018 issued by respondent No.2 be set aside and necessary direction be given to respondent No.2 to correct the name of the petitioner and to add surname of the petitioner in the Birth Certificate.

4. On the other hand, learned advoca