WP(MD)/31931/2026 of S.K.Pulithevanpandian Vs The District Collector on 11 November 2026

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed, challenging the proceedings of the Commissioner of Melur Municipality dated 14.10.2026, thereby rejecting the request of the petitioner to change the name of the son of the petitioner in the birth certificate issued by the second respondent Municipality as P.Mukesh Bala instead of Murukesh Bala. The petitioner is also asking for a consequential mandamus, to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to issue a corrected birth certificate.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition are as follows:- The writ petitioner is married to one Maheshwari. Out of the wedlock, they have a boy born on 13.06.2005. The name of the boy child in the birth certificate issued by the second respondent is mentioned as Murukesh Bala. In all other certificates like the disability certificate, Aaadhar card and school certificates, the name of the boy child is mentioned as Mukesh Bala. The petitioner had also caused the publication in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 21.02.2024, that the name of the boy child shall only be Mukesh Bala. When a request was made to the second respondent Municipality to issue a birth certificate with the name of the boy child mentioned as Mukesh Bala instead of Murukesh Bala, the same is rejected under the impugned communication on the premise that there is no statutory provision enabling such rectification. Rather the impugned communication advises the petitioner that the change of the name published in the Government Gazette is more than sufficient.

3. Challenging the above communication and with a consequential mandamus, this Writ Petition is filed.

4. Mr.R.Paranjothi learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance upon two judgments of this Honourable Court in WP(MD) No.16444 of 2025 dated 19.06.2025 and WP(MD)No.25124 of 2024 dated 02.09.2024, to support his contentions.

5. He would pray that the expression cancellation and correction in the statutory provision of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969, includes even substitution of names. Accordingly, he would submit that the rejection order by the second respondent Municipal Commissioner of Melur is without any justification. He would also bring to the notice of this Court that the child is suffering from mental disability and requires continuous support from the parents and the reflection of the correct name in all the records including the birth certificate is of significance. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing of the writ petition.

6. Per contra the learned Special Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 respectively would submit that Section 15 of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969, provides only for correction or cancellation of entry in the register of birth and death and it does not enable change of name to be entered in the already available register of birth in the second respondent Municipality. Accordingly, they prayed for passing of appropriate orders.

7. Section 15 of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969, reads as under:- “15. Correction or cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths.—If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry of a birth or death in any register kept by him under this Act is erroneous in form or substance, or has been fraudulently or improperly made, he may, subject to such rules as may be made by the State Government with respect to the conditions on which and the circumstances in which such entries may be corrected or cancelled, correct the error or cancel the entry by suitable entry in the margin, without any alteration of the original entry, and shall sign the marginal entry and add thereto the date of the correction or cancellation.”

8. Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Birth and Death Rules, 2025, reads as under:- “11. Correction or cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths under section 15 (1) If it is reported to the Registrar that a clerical or formal error has been made in the register or if such error is otherwise noticed by him and if the register is in his possession, the

Registrar shall enquire into the matter and if he is satisfied that any such error has been made, he shall correct the error (by correcting or canceling the entry) as provided in section 15 and shall in the case of local authorities specified in column (1) of the Table below send an extract of the entry showing the error and how it has been corrected to the officer specified in column

(2) thereof. Local Authorities (1) Officers (2) Village Panchayat Village Panchayat President Town Panchayat Executive Officer Contonment do Municipality Commissioner Neyveli

Lignite Corporation Chief

Health Officer Corporation Commissioner

(2) In the case referred to in the sub-rule (1) if the register is not in his possession, the Registrar shall make a report to the officer specified in the table in sub- rule (1) and call for the relevant register and after enquiring into the matter, if he is satisfied that such error has been made, necessary correction.

(3) Any such correction as mentioned in sub-rule (2) shall be countersigned by the officer specified in the Table in sub-rule (1) in this behalf when the register is received from the Registrar.

(4) If any person asserts that any entry in the register of births and deaths is erroneous in substance, the Registrar may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under section 15 upon production by that person a declaration setting forth the nature of the error and true facts of the case made by two credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case.

(5) Not withstanding anything contained in sub-rules (1) and (4), the Registrar shall make a report of any correction of the kind referred to therein giving necessary details to the officer specified in the table in sub-rule (1).

(6) If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that any entry in the register of births and deaths has been fraudulently or improperly made, he shall make a report giving necessary details to the officer authorized by the Chief Registrar by general or special order in this behalf under section 25 and on hearing from him take necessary action in the matter.

(7) In every case in which an entry is corrected or cancelled under this rule, intimation thereof should be sent to the permanent address of the person who has given information under section 8 or section 9.”

9. The question that arises is whether the change of name or alteration of name or the spelling of the name can be brought within the purview of correction or cancellation of entry in the register of birth and death. In this regard, useful reference can be made to the judgment of the learned Judge of this Honourable Court in WP(MD)No.16444 of 2025 – M.Pandi Selvi v. the

District Collector and two others decided on 19.06.2025, wherein the learned Judge has held as follows:- “5. The interpretation placed by the respondents on Section 15 of the Registration of Birth and Deaths Act, 1969 and Rules, stating that only cancellation and corrections can be made and no alternation is made cannot be coutenanced. The expression cancellation and correction would include even the substitution of the name. Hence, the interpretation placed by the respondents is incorrect and the impugned order is liable to be quashed. “

10. The above judgment is categorical in holding that even substitution of name can be permitted and be brought within the purview of the expression “cancellation and correction” mentioned in Section 15 of the Act.

11. In the light of the categorical pronouncement made by the learned Single Judge of this Honourable Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that a similar benefit can as well be extended to the petitioner in this case as well.

12. Further it is to be noted that the name of the intellectually challenged boy child is mentioned only as P.Mukesh Bala in all the other records like the aadhaar card, disability certificate, school records, the continuation of the name as Murukesh Bala in the birth certificate alone will cause serious difficulties to the differently abled child. Accordingly the Writ Petition stands allowed with the following directions:-

(i) The impugned order dated 14.10.2026, passed by the second respondent is hereby set aside.

(ii) The second and third respondents are hereby directed to carry out corrections in the register of birth maintained by the respondents and correct the name of the boy child from Murukesh Bala to P.Mukesh Bala.

(iii) Thereafter, a corrected certificate mentioning the name of the boy child as P.Mukesh Bala shall be issued.

13. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 11-11-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MRN

To

1. The District Collector Madurai DistrictMadurai

2. The Commissioner Melur Municipality Madurai District

3. The Registrar of Birth and Death Melur Municipality Melur Madurai District

N.DILIP KUMAR, J. MRN WP(MD) No. 31931 of 2026 11-11-2026