Anu B v. The Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P.(MD)No.16774 of 2026 B.Anu ... Petitioner vs.

The Commissioner, Madurai Municipal Corporation, Madurai.

... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No. (H5)O.Mu/018284/2026 dated 19.02.2026 issued by the respondent and quash the same, and consequently, to direct the respondent Corporation of Madurai to correct the mother's name in the birth certificate of petitioner's son K.Amudhan as "B.Anu" instead of "K.Anu" as per Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, within the time limit fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :Mr.B.Chakkaravarthi For Respondent :Mr.S.Vidhyasagar ***** 1/5

O R D E R

The petitioner challenges the proceedings dated 19.02.2026 issued by the respondent, by which her request for correction of her name in the birth certificate of her son, K. Amudhan, was rejected.

2. Heard Mr. B. Chakkaravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. S. Vidyasagar, learned counsel, who accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

3. It is not in dispute that a birth certificate was originally issued to the petitioner's son. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for correction of her son's initial in the birth certificate, and the said request was accepted by the respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted another application seeking correction of her own name from "K. Anu" to "B. Anu", stating that in all her public documents her name is shown as "B. Anu" and that the initial "B" refers to her father, Mr. B. Bala Sekar. The said application was rejected on the ground that a second application for correction was not maintainable.

2/5

4. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that successive applications for correction cannot be entertained and, therefore, the impugned order is justified.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made on either side.

6. The records show that the earlier correction related to the initial of the petitioner's son. The present request pertains to correction of the petitioner's own name from "K. Anu" to "B. Anu". According to the petitioner, the initial "K" refers to her husband, whereas the initial "B" refers to her father. She states that in all her public documents her name is shown as "B. Anu". The error, therefore, appears to be genuine. Merely because an earlier correction was carried out in respect of a different entry, the petitioner cannot be denied correction of her own name. No prejudice would be caused to the respondent if the correction is effected.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the proceedings dated 19.02.2026 are set aside. The respondent is directed to correct the petitioner's name as "B. Anu" instead of "K. Anu" in the birth certificate 3/5

of her son. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. There shall be no order as to costs.

Index :Yes / No 18.06.2026 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No cmr 4/5

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

cmr W.P.(MD)No.16774 of 2026 18.06.2026 5/5