← Library
Madras High CourtWP/3970/2025disposed of

Revathi v. The State Rep By

2025-02-06Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.02.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Revathi ..

Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep.by 1.The Commissioner 2.The Regional Health Officer Region - 5 .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 2nd respondent dated 03.05.2024 passed in MAA 5/Po.Su.Thu/Na.Ka.No.0002/2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to change the wife name in the death certificate bearing the Registration

No.2017/05/055/002395/0 dated 29.08.2017 and pass such further or other order.

For the Petitioner : Mr.V.S.Senthil Kumar For the Respondents : Mr.S.Gopinathan, Standing Counsel

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus challenging the order of the respondent dated 03.05.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to change the name of the petitioner in the death certificate of her husband bearing Registration No.2017/05/055/002395/0 dated 29.08.2017 and for other orders.

2. The case of the Writ Petitioner is that her name is Revathi. The name is there in all the records. However, when the particulars were given at the time of death of her husband, especially when the petitioner was grieving, a phonetically similar name as if her the name is Devaki is entered into. Now, since there is no provision to change the name, in view of the rules, by the

impugned order, the respondents have refused to change the name. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents and also perused the material records of the case.

4. No exception can be made to the impugned order, because as per the rules the authorities cannot change the entire name. But in this case, it is the categorical assertion of the petitioner that the deceased viz., Janakiraman was her husband. There is no other person in the name of Devaki, it is only a mistake that occurred while writing the name by a third person by a casual hearing of the name. It is only an innocuous mistake and there is no other rival claim in this regard.

5. In view of the said assertions made on behalf of the petitioner, since there is no other rival claim and the petitioner is the wife of the said

Janakiraman and all the records of the petitioner categorically shows that her name is only Revathi and not Devaki, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the 2nd respondent is directed to correct the name in the death certificate bearing Registration No.2017/05/055/002395/0 dated 29.08.2017 as Revathi instead of Devaki. The said exercise shall be done within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of the website uploaded copy of this order, without waiting for a certified copy.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

06.02.2025 : No Jer To 1.The Commissioner 2.The Regional Health Officer

Region - 5 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Jer

06.02.2025