A.M.Abdus Salam vs The Commissioner
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 27-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD010757302026}
and W.M.P(MD)No.12070 of 2026
A.M.Abdus Salam
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Commissioner
Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation,
Bharathidasan Road,
Cantonment,
Tiruchirappalli District.
2. The Registrar of Births and Deaths
Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation,
Bharathidasan Road,
Cantonment,
Tiruchirappalli District.
3. The City Health Officer
Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation,
Bharathidasan Road,
Cantonment,
Tiruchirappalli District.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to
call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No.
rd
Su.AA(B.E) GOC/9363/2025 dated 03.12.2025 passed by the 3
respondent, quash the same, and consequently direct the respondents to
correct the mother's name in the birth certificate bearing Registration No.
__________
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
282/2010/38 of the petitioner's son as Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi M from
A.Hasna Fathima and to issue corrected birth certificate within a time
frame to be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner(s) :Mr.Saha
for Mr.Riyas Ahamed R
For Respondent(s) :Mr.R.Surya Prakash
Standing Counsel
ORDER
Challenging the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No. Su.AA(B.E)
rd
GOC/9363/2025 dated 03.12.2025 passed by the 3 respondent, and
consequently direct the respondents to correct the mother's name in the
birth certificate bearing Registration No. 282/2010/38 of the petitioner's
son as Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi M from A.Hasna Fathima and to issue
corrected birth certificate, this writ petition is filed.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner married one M.Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi on 19.04.2010 under
the Special Marriage Act, and the marriage was duly registered bearing
Certificate No. 5 of 2010 on the file of K.Sathanur, Tiruchirappalli
District. The marriage certificate and other connected records clearly
establish the identity of parties and the lawful relationship between the
petitioner and his wife. Out of the said special marriage, the couple were
__________
Page 2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
blessed with two male children, namely A.Ahamed Raasim, born on
08.12.2010, and A.Mohamed Saadh, born on 23.08.2015. Both the
children were born at Renuga Hospital, Sathanoor Road, Tiruchirappalli.
And their births were duly registered.
3. In the birth certificate of the petitioner's son, A.Ahamed Raasim,
the petitioner's wife's name has been entered as A.Hasna Fathima in the
column of mother's name. The said entry was made understanding that
the petitioner's wife had adopted such a name upon marriage. The learned
counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the same is factually
incorrect and the petitioner's wife did not change her name at any point of
time and she continued to be M.Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi which could
be revealed from all the other documents including ration cards, passport
and other necessary documents and other identity records and family
records. The entry of the petitioner's wife's name in his children's birth
certificate as Hasna Fathima is wholly inconsistent with the actual
identity and existing official records. The said mistake was not willful
and deliberate, but purely inadvertent.
4. Pursuant to which, the petitioner had made an application before
st
the 1 respondent along with an affidavit seeking correction of the
__________
Page 3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
petitioner's wife's name in the birth certificate of their children. However,
rd
the same was rejected by the 3 respondent by proceedings dated
03.12.2025 with the direction to make necessary arrangements to effect
the necessary changes in his wife's name through gazette publication.
Challenging the same, this writ petition is filed.
5. The learned counsel relying upon the order of this Court in the
case of S.Gowthami Vs. The District Collector, Tiruppur District &
1
another and the case of Minor.S.Jeganathan, Represented by his
mother S.Sellammal Vs. The District Collector, Erode District &
2
Another , submitted that the instant case in hand is fully covered by the
aforesaid order and sought the indulgence of this Court to set aside the
impugned order and direct the respondent authorities to effect the
necessary correction of the mother's name column following the
mandates of Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act,
1969.
6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents
submitted that under Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths
Act, 1969, the authorities could correct only if it is erroneous and had
1
W.P.No.9067 of 2021 dated 14.06.2024
2
W.P.No.8959 of 2021 dated 14.06.2024
__________
Page 4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
been registered fraudulently or improperly. As far as Rule 11 of the Tamil
Nadu Registration of Births and Death Rules, 2000, the learned counsel
pointed out that the correction or cancellation of entry in the register of
births and deaths under Section 15 could be done only if the same is a
clerical or a formal error. The case in hand do not reveal any such formal
or clerical error, and it cannot be considered as an inadvertent error
caused by the petitioner. The same has been deliberately made. The claim
of the petitioner that the authorities themselves had given a name to his
wife as Hasna Fathima is beyond imagination and the authorities are only
for the purpose of registration of births and deaths and not for naming any
private parties and sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
7. Heard the learned counsels on either sides and carefully perused
the materials available on record .
8. It is very clear from the materials placed before this Court that
the marriage between the petitioner and Mrs.M.Illaya Kanmani
Nanmozhi @ A.Hasna Fathima is a special marriage and inter-religious
marriage. A careful perusal of the records placed before me with respect
to the identity of Mrs.M.Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi @ A.Hasna Fathima
would reveal that she had already converted to Islam. However, it is a
__________
Page 5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
claim of the petitioner that his wife continued to be a Hindu and her name
is not at all changed and she continued to lead a life as a Hindu since his
marriage itself is a special marriage, and her name has never ever been
converted into a Hasna Fathima and it is only M.Illaya Kanmani
Nanmozhi @ A.Hasna Fathima.
9. He pointed out that Rule 11 (4) of the Tamil Nadu Registration
of Births and Death Rules, 2000, would make it clear that 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. He also made
it clear that the petitioner is willing to produce a declaration in this regard
as mandated under Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Births
and Death Rules, 2000, by two credible persons having knowledge of the
facts of the case.
10. Since the facts clearly makes out a case of conversion from
Hindu to Islam, and also the claim of the petitioner is that the marriage
between the petitioner and his wife is a special marriage and he had not
__________
Page 6 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
converted his wife to Islam, this Court is of the considered opinion that
the orders relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case
3
of S.Gowthami Vs. The District Collector, Tiruppur District & another
and the case of Minor.S.Jeganathan, Represented by his mother
4
S.Sellammal Vs. The District Collector, Erode District & Another , is
partially applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. This Court
makes it clear that the facts with respect to conversion of a parent from
one religion to another religion was not dealt with in the above said case.
In that way, this case can be distinguished from the facts and
circumstances of the aforesaid cases. Admittedly, the petitioner's
children, namely A.Ahamed Raasim and A.Mohamed Saadh, were born
to the petitioner and his wife, namely M.Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi @
A.Hasna Fathima and it is only the petitioner who had given information
to the hospital authorities at Renuga Hospital, Sathanoor Road,
Tiruchirappalli that the name of his wife is A.Hasna Fathima. However, it
is seen that the petitioner's wife's name as per other documents continue
to be M.Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi.
nd
11. In view of the above discussions, the 2 respondent is directed
to conduct an enquiry with the petitioner, his parents, and two office
3
W.P.No.9067 of 2021 dated 14.06.2024
4
W.P.No.8959 of 2021 dated 14.06.2024
__________
Page 7 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
bearers of the Administrative Committee of the Jamath concerned to
which the petitioner is a member, and an affidavit is directed to be
received from the head of the two office bearers of the Administrative
Committee of the Jamath to which the petitioner is concerned that the
petitioner's wife continue to be M.Illaya Kanmani Nanmozhi and not
Hasna Fathima. On receipt of such affidavit, the birth certificate bearing
Registration No. 282/2010/38 could be accordingly corrected by making
necessary corrections in the column mother's name and a fresh birth
certificate could be issued within a period of four (4) weeks from the date
of receipt of affidavit from the from two office bearers of the
Administrative Committee of the Jamath concerned.
12. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.
27-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
gbg
__________
Page 8 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
To
1. The Commissioner
Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation
Bharathidasan Road
Cantonment
Tiruchirappalli District
2. The Registrar of Births and Deaths
Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation
Bharathidasan Road
Cantonment
Tiruchirappalli District
3. The City Health Officer
Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation
Bharathidasan Road
Cantonment
Tiruchirappalli District
__________
Page 9 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
gbg
WP(MD) No. 16157 of 2026
27-10-2026
__________
Page 10 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 09:01:56 pm )