Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Iliyas vs Distt. Magistrate Distt. Balrampur And ... on 29 January, 2020
Author: Narendra Kumar Johari
Bench: Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 3 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 4296 of 2012 Petitioner :- Mohammad Iliyas Respondent :- Distt. Magistrate Distt. Balrampur And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- B.K.Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ved Prakash Vaish,J.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard Sri B.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.P. Maurya, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking following prayers:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated 06.04.2012 passed by the Opposite party no.2, entries in the parivar register related with respondent no.4 and his mother as well as resolution passed by Gram Sabha by which the name of respondent no.4 and his mother Saikul Nisha have been entered in the family register of petitioner, contained in Annexure Nos.1, 2 and 3 to this writ petition.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamas commanding the respondent no.1 to conduct an enquiry against the respondents no.2 and 3 in the matter..."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 07.05.2012, an open meeting of Gram Sabha was held to discuss the development issues and it was resolved to enter the name of Irfanullah and Saikul Nisha in the family register of the petitioner. On 14.05.2012, the names of Irfanullah and Saikul Nisha have been entered in the family register of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that names of Irfanullah and Saikul Nisha have wrongly been entered in the family register of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Section 13 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, which reads as under:
"13. Delayed registration of births and deaths.?(1) Any birth or death of which information is given to the Registrar after the expiry of the period specified therefor, but within thirty days of its occurrence, shall be registered on payment of such late fee as may be prescribed.
(2) Any birth or death of which delayed information is given to the Registrar after thirty days but within one year of its occurrence shall be registered only with the written permission of the prescribed authority and on payment of the prescribed fee and the production of an affidavit made before a notary public or any other officer authorised in this behalf by the State Government.
(3) Any birth or death which has not been registered within one year of its occurrence, shall be registered only on an order made by a magistrate of the first class or a Presidency Magistrate after varifying the correctness of the birth or death and on payment of the prescribed fee.
(4) The provisions of this section shall be without prejudice to any action that may be taken against a person for failure on his part to register any birth or death within the time specified therefor and any such birth or death may be registered during the pendency of any such action."
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that an alternative remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner but the petitioner has not availed the same.
We have carefully gone through the submissions advanced by learned counsel for both the parties.
The State Government has framed rules under Section 110 of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 and U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970, the same stipulates preparation and maintenance of family register in 'Form-A' prescribed therein containing family wise name and other particulars of persons constituting the family and residing in the village pertaining to the Gaon Sabha. Section 5, 6 and 6-A of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970 read as under:-
"5. Correction of any existing entry- The Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat) may on an application made to him in this behalf order the correction of any existing entry in the family register and the Secretary of the Gram Sabha shall then correct the register accordingly.
6. Inclusion of names in the register- Any person whose name is not included in the family register may apply to the Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat) for the inclusion of this name therein.
(2) The Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat) shall if, satisfied, after such enquiry as he thinks fit that the applicant is entitled to be registered in the register direct that the name of the applicant be included therein and the Secretary of the Gram Sabha shall include the name accordingly.
[6-A Any person aggrieved by an order made under Rule 5 or Rule 6 may within 30 days from the date of such order prefer an appeal to the Sub-Divisional Officer whose decision shall be final.]"
In the instant case, the petitioner has challenged order dated 06th April, 2012 passed by Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat). Hence, the an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 6-A of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970 is available to the petitioner.
Admittedly, the petitioner has not availed the alternative remedy of appeal as provided under Rule 6-A of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules, 1970.
The provisions of Section 13 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed.
Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, if so advised.
(Narendra Kumar Johri, J.) (Ved Prakash Vaish, J.) Order Date :- 29.1.2020 Shanu/-