Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 178062 (ALL)

ARSHAD AHMAD v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

/11267/2025 · 2025-11-20

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11267 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondent, and Sri Patanjali Chaturvedi, learned Counsel representing the Nagar Nigam Ayodhya. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing and commanding the respondent no.2, i.e. District Magistrate District Ayodhya to direct the opposite party no.3 for issuance of the death certificate of the petitioner's father namely Late Mohd. Shafiq Khan according to the section 9(3) of the U.P. Birth and death rules." 3. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner's father Late Mohd. Shafiq Khan S/o Wazir Khan died on 19.04.2022 while undergoing treatment at King Georges Medical College, Lucknow. The petitioner filled up the Registration Form and submitted it in the year 2024 to the City Magistrate, Ayodhya. The City Magistrate Ayodhya sought a report from Police Station Cantt. The report was forwarded confirming the death of the petitioner's father on 19.04.2022. Being satisfied, the City Magistrate Ayodhya by his order dated 06.12.2024 ordered the Municipal Health Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manuvendra Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Patanjali Chaturvedi Arshad Ahmad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Officer, Municipal Corporation Ayodhya, to take action as per Rules for registration of death of the petitioner's father. Ignoring such report and also the order of the City Magistrate, the Municipal Health Officer, Municipal Corporation Ayodhya, returned the application of the petitioner for registration of death of his father on the ground that that it can only be issued/ registered at the place where the incident of death occurred. 4. It has been submitted that the petitioner submitted an application on 31.10.2025 to the District Magistrate Ayodhya saying that he is ready to deposit the late fee as mentioned in Rule 9(3) of the U.P. Registration of Births and Deaths Rules and the District Magistrate/Sub-Divisional Magistrate can condone such delay in filing of the registration application on payment of late fees. Still his matter has not been considered and, therefore, he has approached this Court. 5. Sri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the State Respondent, has pointed out Section 7 sub-section (2) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 , wherein Registrar of Birth and Death has to first conduct an enquiry and then inform himself carefully of every birth and of every death which takes place in his jurisdiction and after ascertaining the same, register the particulars required to be registered. Sub- section (3) of Section 7 says that every Registrar shall have an office in the local area for which he is appointed. 6. It has been submitted, on the basis of such substantive provision in the Act itself, that the District Registrar at Ayodhya could not have registered the death of the father of the petitioner, who died at K.G.M.C., Lucknow. 7. The application has not been rejected, it has only been returned to be filed at the appropriate place i.e. the office of the Registrar, Births and Deaths at Lucknow. 8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner says that his father was in jail and while in jail he suffered serious illness. The father of the petitioner was referred to K.G.M.C. Lucknow and he died during treatment at Lucknow. 9. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has referred to Section (8)(1)(c) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, to say that in respect of WRIC No. 11267 of 2025 2 Births and Deaths in jail, the Jailor-in-Charge shall inform the officer. 10. However, we find that in the same section i.e. Section 8 sub-clause (b) states that in respect of births and deaths in hospital, health centre, maternity or nursing home or other like institution, the medical officer-in- charge or any person authorized by him on his behalf may send appropriate information for registration of such occurrence before the District Registrar concerned. 11. It is evident that the death of the father of the petitioner occurred at K.G.M.C. Lucknow. The District Registrar Lucknow/ Municipal Health Officer, Municipal Corporation Lucknow, shall have jurisdiction to register the incident of death of the father of the petitioner. 12. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make an appropriate application along with the late fee, as prescribed, before the Nagar Swasthya Adhikari/ District Registrar at Lucknow. November 20, 2025 Rahul WRIC No. 11267 of 2025 3 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench