Upon magistrate-verified proof, municipal authorities must register births reported after one year.

The petitioner claimed that she was born on 16 December 1977 at Lake View Nursing Home, Kolkata, but that her birth had not been registered within the prescribed period.

She relied on a nursing-home birth certificate, Madhyamik certificate, Aadhaar card, PAN card and voter identity card as proof of her date and place of birth.

On 2 April 2026, she submitted a representation to the Municipal Commissioner and the Executive Health Officer, Borough VIII, Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC), seeking registration of her birth and issuance of a birth certificate; the representation remained pending.

During the writ proceedings, the KMC contended that registration after one year required an order under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, and that the petitioner had not sworn an affidavit before a Judicial Magistrate, First Class.

Pursuant to the Court’s direction, the petitioner filed an affidavit affirmed before a Judicial Magistrate, First Class, along with the relevant documents.

The KMC and the State did not dispute the genuineness of the documents produced.

Whether the petitioner’s delayed birth could be registered on the basis of the documents produced and the affidavit affirmed before a Judicial Magistrate, First Class under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969.

Whether the KMC authorities should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation by registering her birth and issuing the consequential birth certificate.

Section 13(2) permits delayed reporting of a birth after 30 days but within one year of its occurrence, while Section 13(3) provides that a birth not registered within one year may be registered only upon an order of the Magistrate having jurisdiction, after verification of the correctness of the birth and payment of the prescribed fee.

The Court also invoked Section 14, concerning the recording of the child’s name in the register after registration of the birth.

The Court noted that the petitioner had produced multiple documents supporting her identity, date and place of birth, including a contemporaneous birth certificate issued by the nursing home and a school certificate.

The petitioner had also cured the procedural objection raised by the KMC by filing an affidavit solemnly affirmed before a Judicial Magistrate, First Class on 21 August 2026.

Since neither the KMC nor the State challenged the genuineness of the documents, the Court found that the petitioner’s birth had been sufficiently established for the purpose of delayed registration.

Applying Sections 13(3) and 14, the Court held that the concerned municipal authorities could proceed with registration and record the petitioner’s name in the register.

The entire exercise was directed to be completed within two weeks from communication of the order.