HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MAIN CASE No: W.P.No.19242 of 2023 PROCEEDING SHEET SL. No. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE 09.03.2026 HN, J I.A.No.1 of 2026 This application is filed in the form of review petition seeking to review the order passed by this Court, whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner was allowed with a direction to the respondent authorities to restore the Birth Certificate of the 2nd writ petitioner dated 17.11.2021 be referred to for all purposes with a further rider that subject to the parties reconciling and resolving their disputes submitting any fresh joint application or any further change may be considered by the respondent authorities. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that said petitioner had submitted an affidavit after 14 months of birth of the 2nd writ petitioner and had sought to incorporate the surname of the 2nd petitioner Hanivtha, Evangeline. It is submitted that this Court while allowing the writ petition had observed that the 4th respondent had submitted various Contd., SL. No. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE documents and sought for incorporating the surname of the 4th respondent without consent of the 1st petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the matter of Mrs. Akella Lalitha Vs. Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao and another1. Whereby, the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to the importance of the surname and relevancy in identifying person's family and also lineage of the family. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner. This Court while allowing the writ petition and also observed that the 4th respondent has suppressed the fact that the 1st petitioner and the 4th respondent were living separately since November, 2020 and a divorce case was pending from February, 2022. Nothing could have precluded the 4th respondent in submitting facts before the respondent authorities for taking an appropriate decision instead the 4th respondent chose to suppress the said facts. Contd., 1 AIR 2022 SC 3544 SL. No. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE On these considerations, this Court is not inclined to entertain the contention of the 4th respondent. Scope of review application is very limited and the petitioner would have to satisfy the Court on the error committed by this Court which would be contrary to the available material on record. The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be applicable to the present facts and circumstances. On these considerations, this Court is not inclined to interfere or inclined to entertain the review of petition. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. ______ HN, J SR