APHC010435412026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE 25th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 23704 OF 2026 Between: 1. Gajulamandyam Deepika,, W/o. Sk. Karimulla @ Audi, Aged about 42 years, Occ House wife, Rio. Door No 6-13-39/2a, Poolathota, East Gudur, Gudur Town, Tirupathi District -524123 2. Gajulamandyam Lipcika, , D/o. SK. Karimulla @ Audi and Gajulamandyam Deepika, Aged about 12 years, R/o. Door No 6-13-39/2a, Poolathota, East Gudur, Gudur Town, Tirupathi District - 524123 ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration and Urban Development (MA and UD), 4th Floor, Rayapudi Post, Tulluru Mandal, Amaravati, Guntur District 522238 2. The Director, Department of Municipal Administration, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Tadepalle, Guntur District 522501 3. The Gudur Municipality, Rep. by its Municipal Commissioner, SPSR Nellore District 524101 4. Sk Karimulla Audi, S/o. Khadar Basha, Aged about 45 years, Occ Business, R/o. Veerareddipalli, Gudur Town, Tirupathi District 524101 ...Respondents 2 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue the writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of mandamus to set aside the Endorsement dated 29.06.2026 of the 2nd respondent, subsequently to direct the Respondents 1 and 2 to consider the surname of 1st petitioner for the minor 2nd petitioner as per the settled law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in the case of Githa Hariharan and Anr. versus Reserve Bank of India and Anr. reported in (1999) 1 SCR 669 as well as in the case of Mrs. AkeIla Lalithe versus Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao and Anr. reported in (2022) 6 SCR 790 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to suspend the Endorsement dated 29.06.2026 of the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such IA NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to amend the Writ Prayer in the Writ affidavit and the Petition of WP No 23704 / 2026 as follows Therefore, it is prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue the writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of mandamus to set aside the Endorsement dated 29.06.2026 of the 3rd respondent, subsequently to direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to consider the surname of 1st petitioner for the minor 2nd petitioner as per the settled law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in the case of Githa Hariharan and Anr. versus Reserve Bank of India and Anr. reported in (1999) 1 SCR 669 as well as in the case of Mrs. Akella Lalitha versus Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao and Anr. reported in (2022) 6 SCR 790 and pass Counsel for the Petitioners: K RAMA KOTESWARA RAO 3 Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri K. Rama Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Gudapati Lakshmi Narayana, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3/Municipality and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondents. Despite service of notice to the unofficial respondent No.4, no appearance is entered. 2. The grievance of the petitioners in the instant Writ Petition is against the action of the respondents in refusing to change the surname of the 2nd petitioner a minor, to her mother’s (1st petitioner) surname. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the 1st petitioner and the 4th respondent got married in the year 2010. As both of them belonging to different religions, the 4th respondent has converted to Hindu religion and marriage was performed as per the Hindu religious customs. After the 1st petitioner has given birth to the 2nd petitioner, certain marital discords that have developed between the 1st petitioner and the 4th respondent. Leading to filing of Criminal/Civil cases. 4. The 1st petitioner contends that she alone is taking care of the 2nd petitioner and 4th respondent is not providing any maintenance to either of the petitioners and he is addicted to bad vices. The 1st petitioner thus desires to raise and bring up the child under her surname. Thus, the petitioners approached the respondent authorities seeking change of surname of the 2nd 4 petitioner in the birth certificate, to her (1st petitioner) surname. The said requisition of the petitioners was rejected by respondent No.3 as not permissible. 5. The petitioners contend that the 2nd petitioner is pursuing her education and is currently in 10th standard and she is supposed to remit the examination fee and the last date for payment of the said fee is approaching fast is nearby. 6. The petitioner apprehends that unless she remits the fee with the changed surname the SSC certificate that would be issued by Board will not reflect the changed surname. Thus, pleads urgency and prays for a direction to consider her request. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his contention relies on the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Githa Hariharan and another V. Reserve Bank of India and another and Mrs. Akella Lalitha V. Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao Vs. Another 1 . In Mrs. Akella Lalitha V. Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao Vs. Another , the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that the mother being the only natural guardian of the child has the right to decide the surname of the child. 8. In this regard, Judgment rendered by the High Court of Calcutta in Shrotriya Ghosh Vs. The Registrar of Births and death2 is also relevant to consider. 1 [2022] 6 S.C.R. 790 2 High Court of Calcutta in WPA No.17697 of 2025, dated 24.12.2025 5 9. The Calcutta High Court placing reliance on the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mrs. Akella Lalitha (referred supra) and after taking note of the provisions of the Registration of Births and Death Act, 1969, directed the Municipal Authorities to issue Birth Certificate afresh. 10. Considered the submissions. 11. Placing reliance of the Judgments referred supra, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to issue a fresh Birth Certificate by carrying out corrections and incorporating the 1st petitioner’s surname as the 2nd petitioner surname, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 12. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 25-09-2026 MSI 6 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 23704 OF 2026 Dated: 25-09-2026 MSI