Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J
RAJASEKHARAN.V – Appellant
Versus
THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS – Respondent
WP(C)/35667/2018
Registration - Birth Registration - Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 - Sections 13(3) and 17; Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 - Rule 13(3) - The court emphasized the necessity for a non-availability certificate if birth registration is not found, facilitating compliance for legal documents.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to register his birth, which was not registered at birth due to parental oversight. He required a birth certificate for a visa application to Canada, leading him to request a non-availability certificate from the local registrar.
Finding of the Court:
The court concluded that given the available documentation and the respondent's admissions, the burden lay on the respondent to verify records beyond the years initially cited and issue the non-availability certificate if no registration was found.
Issues: Whether the local authority has the obligation to issue a non-availability certificate for the unregistered birth as per the relevant legal provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the effective verification of records is mandatory, and if confirmed that no birth registration exists, the certificate must be issued to facilitate further legal processes.
Final Decision: The court ordered the respondent to verify the birth records and, if necessary, issue a non-availability certificate.
JUDGMENT
AS per the averments in this petition, the petitioner was born on 11.12.1982 at the residence of his parents at Pullazhi Village, Thrissur District that the petitioner’s parents had failed to take steps to register the birth of the petitioner with the office of the respondent- Registrar of Births and Deaths attached to the local authority concerned. Exts.P-2 to P-4 are copies of the relevant pages of the S.S.L.C Book, Aadhar Card, Passport, etc., wherein, the petitioner’s date of birth has been recorded as 11.12.1982. Ext.P-5 is the legal heirship certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Chittur certifying that the petitioner and his mother are the only legal heirs of his deceased father, V.R.Chandran. The petitioner is now processing papers for grant of visa to emigrate to Canada and the emigration authorities of the government of that foreign country insists that the birth certificate should be produced and that the name of the party concerned as well as the names of the parents and the date of birth of the party shown should be in consonance with particulars in that regard as shown in other documents like passport etc. Hence, the petitioner had approached the respondent, who is a notified Registrar of Births and Deaths attached to Thrissur Municipal Corporation, for taking getting the birth registered, in terms of the provisions contained in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1999 and the Rules framed thereunder. In view of the long delay in taking steps in that regard, prior permission from an officer of the rank of Sub Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer is required under Sec.13(3) of the abovesaid Act before the birth could be registered and for the issuance of the birth certificate in that regard.
The said statutory authority under Sec.13(3), viz. Sub Divisional Magistrate/RDO concerned has informed the petitioner that certificate in Form No.10, as envisaged in Rule.13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 regarding the non-availability of registration of the birth of the party concerned, in the records of that notified Registrar concerned. For that purpose, the petitioner had approached the respondent for the grant of Form No.10 Certificate. The petitioner has been informed that the Health Inspector attached to the said Municipal Corporation has been notified as the Sub-Registrar of Births and Deaths of that corporation and the said official had thereupon issued Ext.P-1 letter dated 28.07.2015 stating that the birth of the petitioner has not been registered as per the zonal records of that office from the years 1982 to 1992. Ext.P-1 is a letter addressed by the respondent to the petitioner, the gist of which reads as follows:
“Sub: Birth Not Registered Ref: As per the Request given on 27/07/2015 This is to inform to Mr.Rajasekharan Vichattu, S/O Late Chandran.V.R as per the above mentioned request you have submitted to us, that your birth was not registered in our Zonal records from the year
1982-1992”
2. Ext.P-1 is the letter signed by the Health Inspector and the seal of the Sub-Registrar of Births and Deaths, of the Thrissur Municipal Corporation is also affixed. The petitioner was thereafter informed by the office of the Sub Divisional Magistrate/RDO concerned that though Ext.P-1 stated about the non-registration of the petitioner's birth as per the zonal records for the years in question, his request under Sec.13(3), could be considered only if the requisite certificate in Form.10 proforma prescribed under the Rules is produced before the RDO. It is in light of these aspects, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with the following prayers:
date of birth was not registered in the office of the respondent as per the records available in the office of the respondent.
(ii) any other writ, order or d
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
