Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/1757/2020 of KAMLA DEVI Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 17 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1757/2020 Kamla Devi and another --Petitioners Versus State Of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar
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.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPMS/1757/2020
Kamla Devi and another --Petitioners Versus State Of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. No representation for the petitioners. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State.
2. Mother of petitioners died while undergoing treatment in B.D. Pandey (Male) District Hospital at Nainital on 21.10.2019. A certificate was issued by Principal Medical Superintendent of the concerned hospital certifying that mother of petitioners passed away on 21.10.2019.
3. Petitioners thereafter applied for correction of name of their mother as indicated in the death certificate. Their request for correction was turned down by Principal Medical Superintendent concerned vide order dated 07.09.2020. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached this Court challenging rejection order dated
07.09.2020.
4. Learned State Counsel submits that in the Aadhaar Card as well as in Bed Head Ticket of the Hospital, name of petitioners’ mother is mentioned as Smt. Parvati Devi. Thus he submits that Medical Superintendent of the Hospital did not commit any mistake while issuing death certificate and the prayer made by petitioners for correction was rightly rejected.
5. This Court do not find any reason to interfere in the matter.
6. Petitioners contend that their mother was also known by her other name i.e. Pratima Devi, and her bank account was also opened with that name, i.e. Pratima Devi; however, due to rejection of their request for correction of her name, the amount lying in her bank account cannot be withdrawn.
7. Learned State Counsel, submits that if what petitioners’ contend is correct, then they can approach a competent Civil Court for declaration and they can also apply for succession certificate as per provisions of Indian Succession Act.
8. Since name of petitioners’ mother was recorded in death certificate based on her Aadhaar Card and Bed Head Ticket of the Hospital, therefore, this Court do not find any scope for interference with impugned rejection order.
9. The writ petition, however, is disposed of with liberty to petitioners to approach a competent civil Court or a forum under Indian Succession Act, which shall consider petitioners’ prayer, as per law.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 17.08.2026 Mahinder