SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 14375

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
RENUKABEN INDRAVADAN GANDHIV/sTHE STATE OF GUJARAT
R/SCA/16413/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16413 of 2025 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ==========================================================

RENUKABEN INDRAVADAN GANDHI Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR NIKUNJ KANARA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DEEPAK P SANCHELA(2696) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.

PRACHCHHAK Date : 12/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Nikunj Kanara, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent no.1 and Mr. Deepak Sanchela, learned counsel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent no.2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing today.

2. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Gujarat Registration of Birth and Death Rules, 2004 seeking following reliefs:

“[A] YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow this petition;

[B] YOUR LORDSHIPS may please to issue appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned order dated 06/10/2025 passed by Respondent No. 2 and further be pleased to direct Respondent No. 2 to correct its Birth Register [C] by showing the petitioner's correct birth date "06/03/1961" and thereby further be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to issue the fresh Birth Certificate;

[D] Pending admission, hearing and till final disposal of this petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to grant ad interim relief by directing the respondent to correct its Birth Register by showing the petitioner's correct birth date and other required correct missing details and further be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to issue the fresh Birth Certificate;

[E] YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to pass ex-parte ad interim relief in terms of Para (C);

[F] Such other and further relief as may be deemed just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be granted.”

3. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the this petition is filed by the petitioner for correction of her birth date mentioned in the Extract of the Birth Register. That, the respondent no. 2 is denying the correction in the birth register maintained by respondent no. 2 under the Gujarat Registration of Birth and Death Act along with the Rules framed thereunder. That, the petitioner had made representation to respondent no. 2 that she was born in early morning hours of 06.03.1961, shortly after midnight but unfortunately, the entry in the Extract of the Birth Register incorrectly reflects the date as 05.03.1961. That, in other documents including School Leaving Certificate, Aadhar Card and the Passport, etc the birth date of the petitioner was recorded as 06.03.1961. That, the petitioner had filed an application dated 17.09.2025 before respondent no.2, under section 15 of Registration of Birth and Death Act whereby the application was rejected by the authority vide communication/order dated 06.10.2025 and refused to carry out correction as mentioned above in the Register because of want of jurisdiction.

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned communication/order dated 06.10.2025 passed by Sub Registrar, Navsari Mahanagarpalika, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

Perused the materials available on record.

6. Learned counsel Mr. Sindhi has submitted that the impugned communication/order passed by the Mahanagarpalika is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to the facts and material on record and t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top