Telangana High Court
WP/26911/2006 of Ch. Raja Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by The Chief on 27 December 2006
Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO: 26911 of 2006 Dated: 27-12-2006 Between: Ch. Raja Rao ..... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by the Chief Registrar, Department of Medical and Health, Hyderabad and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION
THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION NO: 26911 of 2006
Between:
Dated: 27-12-2006
Ch. Raja Rao
AND
..... PETITIONER
The State of Andhra Pradesh,Rep., by the Chief Registrar,Department of Medical and Health,Hyderabad and another.
.....RESPONDENTS
THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINIWRIT PETITION NO: 26911 of 2006
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned GovernmentPleader appearing for the first respondent and Sri P.B.Subramanyam,learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring theproceedings of the second respondent dated 19-12-2006, rejecting therequest of the petitioner for issuance of the date of birth certificate ofhis child on the ground that he has not registered his son’s namewithin 15 years from the date of his birth as arbitrary and illegal.
It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that anidentical question has been considered by this Court in W.P.No.26690of 2003 and by order dated 07-01-2004 it was held that the applicationof the petitioner therein for entering the names of his children in therespective birth certificates shall be considered on the basis of anyadditional information furnished by him.
Learned counsel for the second respondent does not dispute thesame. In the circumstances, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writpetition in terms of the directions in W.P.No.26690 of 2003.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the secondrespondent is directed to reconsider the application of the petitionerand enter the name of his child in the birth certificate, after satisfyinghimself that the certificate relates to the person, whose name wassought to be entered. It is made clear that it is also open to the secondrespondent to receive any further or additional information in thisregard. Such exercise shall be completed, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as tocosts.
______________G. ROHINI, J
Dated: 27-12-2006KLP