Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Vijayan Vs. Union of India

Vijayan vs Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 05, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1097375

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vijayan

Respondent

Union of India

Excerpt

.....as per ext.p2 school record. however his date of birth is shown wrongly in his passport as 15.06.1959 and the petitioner filed application before the 2nd respondents to have it corrected, the receipt of which has been produced as ext.p4. but the 2nd respondent rejected the application on the ground that he has power to carry out correction only if the date of birth correction is two years or less and hence the petitioner seeks immediate intervention of this w.p.c. no. 26679 of 2013 -2- court for redressal of the grievance.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this court in swapna siju vs. union of india (2012 (4) klt419 in support of the position that, as far as the applicants born before 26.01.1989 are concerned, copy of extract of the sslc book can be relied on for correction of date of birth without insisting for birth certificate.4. the learned central government counsel appearing for the respondents submits that petitioner will have to file an on- line application along with an affidavit explaining how the mistake has occurred.5. in the said circumstances, the petitioner is relegated to file an on-line application for correction of date of birth along with an affidavit and the documents relied upon by the petitioner, on which event, the same shall be accepted and considered by the respondents, passing appropriate orders within a period of three weeks. the writ petition is disposed of. p.r. ramachandra menon, judge. kp/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE5H DAY OF NOVEMBER201314TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 26679 of 2013 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VIJAYAN, AGED50YEARS, S/O.KUNJU PILLAI, K.V.SADANAM, VETTIYAR, MANKAMKUZHY P.O., MAVELIKKARA ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SRI.ARUN BOSE RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI110001.

2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, COCHIN682001. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0511-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rvs/ WP(C).No. 26679 of 2013 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF PETITIONER'S SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE ADMISSION REGISTER OF THE PETITIONER, ISSUED FROM GOVERNMENT MOHAMMADAN LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL AT VETTIYAR. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : ----------------------- NIL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE rvs/ P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

======================== W.P.(C). No. 26679 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of November, 2013 JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: "i. To issue a declaration that petitioner is entitled to get corrected his date of birth in his passport as 15.06.1963 instead of 15.06.1959. ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 2nd respondent to effect correction in respect of the date of birth of the petitioner shown in his passport, in the light of Exhibits P1 to P4." 2. The case of the petitioner is that, the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 15.06.1963 as per Ext.P2 school record. However his date of birth is shown wrongly in his passport as 15.06.1959 and the petitioner filed application before the 2nd respondents to have it corrected, the receipt of which has been produced as Ext.P4. But the 2nd respondent rejected the application on the ground that he has power to carry out correction only if the date of birth correction is two years or less and hence the petitioner seeks immediate intervention of this W.P.C. No. 26679 of 2013 -2- Court for redressal of the grievance.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in Swapna Siju Vs. Union of India (2012 (4) KLT419 in support of the position that, as far as the applicants born before 26.01.1989 are concerned, copy of extract of the SSLC book can be relied on for correction of date of birth without insisting for birth certificate.

4. The learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that petitioner will have to file an on- line application along with an affidavit explaining how the mistake has occurred.

5. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is relegated to file an on-line application for correction of date of birth along with an affidavit and the documents relied upon by the petitioner, on which event, the same shall be accepted and considered by the respondents, passing appropriate orders within a period of three weeks. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. kp/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial