Solanki Karsanbhai Muljibhai vs Registrar (Birth And Death) , Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation

Hemant M. Prachchhak, J

RULE returnable forthwith. Learned counsel Mr. Kushal Desai, who appears on advance copy being served, waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent.

With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Act") and Rules framed thereunder, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

"A) Be pleased to admit and allow this Special Civil Application;

B) Be pleased to issue the writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to direct the respondent authority to change the name of the parents as "Solanki Karsanbhai Muljibhai in the column of Father and Solanki Meenaben Karsanbhai in the column of mother" in the birth certificate of Jatinkumar at Ann:C, by considering the application dated 20.4.2026 at Ann:A as well as the adoption deed dated 22.3.2022 at Ann:B in the interest of justice;

C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to direct the respondent authority to decide the application dated 20.4.2026 Ann: A in the interest of justice.

D) Be pleased to grant such other and further relief that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

It is the case of the petitioner that, since there was no children born out of the wedlock of the petitioner with his wife, the petitioner and his wife decided to adopt "Jatin" with the consent of his biological parents Maheshbhai and Pushpaben being a younger brother and accordingly, an adoption deed came to be executed between the petitioner along with his wife Pushpaben and Maheshbhai Muljibhia Solanki and his wife Pushpa Maheshbhai Solanki on 22.03.2022. That, the said adoption deed came to be registered with the office of the Sub Registrar, Ahmedabad-6 Naroda bearing Registration No. 7095/2022. That, the adoption was took place with the consent of Biological parents of Jatin as petitioner and biological father of Jatin are real brothers and accordingly, the petitioner wanted his name to be shown as a father of Jatin and therefore, on the basis of the said adoption deed, the same was declared in official gazette on 21.09.2023 and the name of Jatin came to be shown in the said gazette at Sr. No. 33 as Solanki Jatin Karshanbhai under the column of new name. That therefore, the petitioner approached the concerned authority of respondent Corporation to change the names of the parents in the Birth Certificate of Jatin, however, after numerous efforts, there was no response received from the respondent authority.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the action and inaction on the part of the respondent authority, present petition is preferred.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application made by the petitioner before the respondent authority is pending since long and till date the same has not been decided by the respondent authority and therefore, leaned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the present petition be allowed and the respondent authority be directed to decide the application made by the petitioner within a stipulated time period.

Learned counsel Mr. Kushal Desai, who appears for the respondent on advance copy being served, has submitted that the application is pending since long and therefore, this Court may pass appropriate orders to decide the same within a stipulated time period.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the material placed on record. Considering the submissions canvassed by both the sides and considering the facts of the case, the present petition is partly allowed. The Registrar, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation is hereby directed to decide the application dated 20.04.2026 made by the present petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of writ of this Order, in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.

Direct service is permitted.