MISS.OVIYA SUDHASH vs STATE OF KARNATAKA,
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 29505 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
MISS.OVIYA SUDHASH
D/O. SRI.SUDHASH NATARAJAN
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
R/AT NO.76, RANGA RAO ROAD,
SHANKARPURAM,
BANGALORE-560004.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S LAKSHMINARAYANA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT
OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BANGALORE
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
(PRESENTLY GREATER
BENGALURU AUTHORITY)
HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R. SQUARE,
BENGALURU-560 002.
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
3. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER/
JOINT DIRECTOR
CHIEF REGISTRAR OF
BIRTHS AND DEATHS
BRUHAT BANGALORE
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
(PRESENTLY GREATER
BENGALURU AUTHORITY)
HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R. SQUARE,
BENGALURU-560 002.
4. THE REGISTRAR
CHIEF REGISTRAR OF
BIRTHS AND DEATHS
BRUHAT BANGALORE
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
(PRESENTLY GREATER
BENGALURU AUTHORITY)
HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R. SQUARE,
BENGALURU-560 002.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAJAYOGA K., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. PAWAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT JDS/PR/316/2026-27
DATED 31.08.2026 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2
VIDE ANNEXURE P.2; DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS 2
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
TO 4 TO CORRECT THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER NAME
IN THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS MARY SUDHASH.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is the daughter of Mr. Sudhash
Natarajan and Mrs. Mary Sudhash. The petitioner is
born on 15.01.2005 and her birth is entered in the
Register of Births [ Annexure-A ] recording the father's
name as “N. Sudhash” and mother's name as “J.
Antony Lourdu Mary”. The petitioner relies upon her
own Aadhaar Card and her parents’ Aadhaar Cards
and also her academic credentials to contend that
there is an error in mentioning her mother's name as
“J. Antony Lourdu Mary” . The petitioner's mother has
sworn to an affidavit and taken out a paper
publication stating that her maiden name is “J.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
Antony Lourdu Mary” but she has changed her name
to “ Mary Sudhash” after marriage.
2. The petitioner's grievance is with the
fourth respondent’s Endorsement dated 31.08.2026
[Annexure-P] . The fourth respondent has issued this
impugned Endorsement informing the petitioner that
the change in the mother's name could be considered
if official Government documents are produced. Sri.
S. Lakshminarayana, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri. Rajayoga K, a learned High Court
Government Pleader who accepts notice for the first
respondent, and Sri Pawan Kumar, a learned
standing counsel for the second to fourth
respondents who accepts notice for these
respondents, are heard for the disposal of the petition
examining the following questions.
[A] Whether the fourth respondent can insist
upon Official/Government records despite
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
the petitioner furnishing her
Passport/Aadhaar card/ her mother’s PAN
card and her own academic records, and
[B] Whether this Endorsement could have been
issued without instituting an enquiry as is
contemplated under Rule 11 of the
Registration of Births and Deaths Rules,
1999 [for short, ‘the Rules’].
3. The petitioner's case is that her mother,
when she was born, was known by her maiden name
“J. Antony Lourdu Mary” , and she has changed her
name to “Mary Sudhash” and that this change is
reflected in the passport obtained in the year 2019, in
her Aadhaar card and PAN card. These may not
indicate a clerical error but the petitioner's mother
changing her maiden would definitely warrant
consideration for the change in the Register to
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
prevent difficulties otherwise. There must be an
enquiry.
4. The expanse of the jurisdiction under
Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths
Act, 1969 and Rule 11 of the Rules provides for
correction of entries in Form or Substance , and this
jurisdiction must include circumstances such as the
present case. Therefore, this Court answers the
questions in favour of the petitioner opining that the
fourth respondent has issued the impugned
Endorsement without considering the material
circumstances.
5. Further, this Court is of the view that the
petition must be disposed of reserving liberty to the
petitioner to file a certified copy of this Order with the
fourth respondent directing this respondent to
institute an enquiry as contemplated under Rule 11
of the Rules to verify the documents adverted to
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
above and take necessary decision within a specified
period of time. In the light of the afore, the following:
ORDER
[A] The petition is allowed quashing the
impugned Endorsement dated
31.08.2026 [Annexure-B] reserving
liberty to the petitioner to file a
certified copy of this Order with the
fourth respondent.
[B] The fourth respondent is called upon
to institute an enquiry as is
contemplated for corrections in form
and substance under Rule 11 of the
Rules; issue notice to the petitioner of
such enquiry with opportunity to
produce documents.
[C] The fourth respondent is called upon
to conclude the proceedings within
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55095
WP No. 29505 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010641972026
three months from the date of receipt
of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
AN/-