[Cites 13, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
D.Veeraiah vs The District Collector on 2 January, 2026
Author: R.Vijayakumar
Bench: R.Vijayakumar
W.P(MD).No.30808 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ORDER RESERVED ON : 12.12.2025
ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 02.01.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P.(MD).No.30808 of 2025
D.Veeraiah ....Petitioner
Vs
1.The District Collector
Thanjavur District
Thanjavur
2.The Municipal Health Officer
Thanjavur Municipality
Thanjavur District
3.The Commissioner
Pudukkottai Municipal Corporation
Pudukkottai
(R3 is suo motu impleaded vide Court
order dated 04.12.2025) ....Respondents
Prayer: This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to
the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.
2078/2025/H.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 1st
and 2nd respondents to approve the petitioner's application dated 08.08.2025.
1/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
W.P(MD).No.30808 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ahamed Bhuhari Wasim Askar
For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan
Additional Government Pleader for R1
:Mr.N.Dilip Kumar for R2
:Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram for
M/s.R.B.Law Associates
Standing Counsel for R3
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by
the second respondent herein wherein the request of the petitioner to
incorporate his name and his wife's name as parents of two girl children
namely T.Malarvizhi and T.Kumutha in the Birth Certificate has been
rejected.
(A).Factual Matrix:
2.One Tamilselvan and Saraswathy are the parents of Ms.T.Malarvizhi
and Ms.T.Kumutha. The father had passed away on 08.07.2015 and the
mother had passed away on 03.05.2018. Thereafter, both the girl children
were under the custody of their father's brother namely Chandrasekar and his
wife Amuthavalli. Ms.T.Kumutha was born on 17.12.2005 and
Ms.T.Malarvizhi was born on 01.04.2010.
3.On 11.07.2018, the paternal uncle and aunt of both girl children
namely Chandrasekar and Amuthavalli had given the said girl children in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
adoption to the present writ petitioner namely Veeraiah and his wife
Manimegalai by conducting an adoption function. An invitation was printed
and a function was conducted in the presence of the relatives. The paternal
uncle and aunt have given these two girl children in adoption to the petitioner
and his wife. The petitioner is none other than the brother of Mrs.Saraswathy
who is the biological mother of the girl children. Therefore, it is clear that the
paternal uncle and aunt have given the girl children in adoption to the
maternal uncle and aunt.
4.It could also be seen from the records that the writ petitioner is
working as a Driver in Pudukkottai Municipal Corporation. According to
him, even after 10 years of married life, they are not blessed with any
children.
5.In order to record the adoption that had taken place on 11.07.2018, a
registered adoption deed was executed by paternal uncle and aunt of the girl
children on 13.01.2025. Even though both the girl children were given in
adoption to the writ petitioner and his wife under the function that took place
on 11.07.2018, the registered adoption deed refers only to the adoption of the
younger child namely T.Malarvizhi. The adoption deed is restricted to the
adoption of Ms.T.Malarvizhi because in the year 2025, the elder daughter
Ms.T.Kumutha had already attained majority. However, on the date of
performance of adoption ceremony namely on 11.07.2018, both elder and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
younger girl were aged about 13 and 8 respectively.
6.Based upon the adoption deed, the petitioner had approached the
second respondent Municipality to issue a fresh birth certificate in favour of
both the girl children incorporating the name of the adoptive parents. This
application was made on 19.02.2025 and it has been rejected under the
impugned order dated 28.05.2025 on the ground that when they obtained
legal opinion from their counsel, they were informed that the adoption deed
cannot be considered to be legally admissible document for amending the
name of the parents in the birth certificate. Based upon the said findings, the
request of the petitioner was rejected. Challenging the same, the present writ
petition has been filed.
(B).Contentions of the counsels:
7.According to the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, both the girl
children were adopted while they are 13 and 18 years old respectively by way
of performing adoption ceremony on 11.07.2018 in the presence of the elders
by distribution of invitation. According to him, the registration of adoption is
not mandatory under the laws applicable to the petitioner as well as the
adopted children. According to him, he is employed in the third respondent
Corporation and he wants to incorporate the name of both the girl children in
his service records so that they would become eligible for his service
benefits. He further submitted that they are not blessed with children for more
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
than 10 years of their married life and both girl children are none other than
his own sister's daughter. Being an adoption between close relatives, the
registration of the adoption is not mandatory. He further submitted that the
third respondent Municipal Corporation refuses to incorporate the name of
both the girl children in the service records of the petitioner on the ground
that the birth certificate incorporating the name of the petitioner and wife is
not been produced. Therefore, they approached the second respondent for
amendment of the birth certificate already issued to the girl children. Insisting
upon the Court order and not being satisfied with the adoption deed
ceremony and the adoption deed, the second respondent has now rejected the
request for amendment of birth certificate on both girl children.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent
Municipality submitted that the adoption deed refers only to the adoption of
the younger girl child namely T.Malarvizhi. He had further submitted that the
writ petitioner and his wife have to resort to the adoption under the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Under the said Act, the
Regulations have been framed in the year 2002. He had also relied upon
Regulation Nos.36 and 38. He pointed out Regulation No.40 provides for
incorporation of the names of the adoptive parents as parents of the adopted
child as mentioned in the adoption order issued by the District Magistrate. He
also relied upon Section 58 of the Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
(C).Enquiry by the Court
9.This Court has directed the petitioner and his wife to appear in
person along with both girl children. The elder daughter is 20 years and she is
studying in College and the younger daughter is 15 years old and she is
studying in the School. Both the girl children were enquired in the Chamber
in the absence of the writ petitioner and his wife. In unison, they stated that
after the death of their parents, only the petitioner and her wife are taking
care of them and spending towards their educational expenses for the past 10
years. They are comfortable in their maternal uncle's house and they would
continue to be in his custody. They expressed their intention to continue to
reside with the writ petitioner and his wife.
10.The petitioner and his wife were enquired by this Court in the
Chamber. They have stated that they are not blessed with children for so
many years and they are happy to adopt these two girl children who are none
other than the petitioner's sister's daughters. They have further submitted that
the petitioner's wife namely Manimegalai is none other than the sister of the
girl children's father namely T.Tamilselvan.
11.The District Child Protection Officer, Government Children Home
Campus, Thanjavur in his report dated 28.11.2025 has submitted that the writ
petitioner is a Driver in the third respondent Municipal Corporation and from
the date of death of their parents, the children are residing with the writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
petitioner and his wife. It is further reported that none of the other relatives
have come forward to take care of the girl children. He had further reported
that the writ petitioner is receiving a salary of Rs.41,000/-. Though the
petitioner got married in the year 2008, so far they have not been blessed with
any child. The petitioner and his wife are taking care of both the children and
the children feel comfortable and happy in the custody of the petitioner and
his wife. He had further reported that the writ petitioner is capable of
providing basic amenities, financial help, education and care to the children.
(D).Analysis:
12.In the light of the above said facts, let us consider the objections
raised by the second respondent in the impugned order for rejecting the
request of the writ petitioner for incorporating the name of the adoptive
parents in the birth certificate of both children.
13.A perusal of the impugned order reveals that it has been passed
solely on the ground that the adoption deed cannot be considered to be a
legally acceptable document for amending the birth certificate of both the girl
children.
14.Let us consider the legal position on the objection raised by the
second respondent Municipality.
15.Both the girl children, the petitioner and his wife are governed by
the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. As per Section 16 of Hindu
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
Adoptions and Maintenance Act, whenever an adoption deed is registered,
the Court shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with
the provisions of the Act unless and until it is disproved. As per the Act
applicable to the writ petitioner and the girl children, after the death of the
parents of the girl children, the paternal uncle and aunt have given both the
girl children in adoption to the maternal uncle and aunt by way of conducting
ceremonies on 11.07.2018. When the adoption ceremony had taken place, the
elder child was 13 years old and the younger child was 8 years old and
therefore, both the girl children were capable of being given in adoption as
per Section 10 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
16.After the death of the biological parents, as a guardian, the paternal
uncle and aunt have given adoption in favour of the writ petitioner.
Therefore, they are also capable of giving in adoption as per Section 9 of the
Act. When both the girl children were adopted in the year 2018, the age
difference between the elder girl child and the adoptive father was more than
21 years. Therefore, the condition specified under Section 11 of the Hindu
Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 has also been satisfied. An invitation
has been printed for such an adoption ceremony which was followed by a
registered adoption deed dated 13.01.2025. The said adoption deed reflects
the ceremonies performed on 11.07.2018. However, the adoption deed refers
only to the adoption of the younger girl child in view of the fact that the elder
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
girl child by that time had attained majority. No contra records have been
placed before this Court disputing the adoption. In such circumstances, the
Court has to invoke Section 16 of the Act that adoption has been made in
compliance with the provisions of the Act.
17.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment reported in (2013) 3
SCC 409 ( Param Pal Singh through father Vs. National Insurance
Company and another) in Paragraph No.14 has held as follows:
“14.In this context, it will be worthwhile to note the
requirement of registration of an adoption deed. Section 17 of the
Registration Act specifically refers to the documents of which
registration is compulsory. The deed of adoption is not one of the
documents mentioned in sub-section (1) of Section 17 which
mandatorily requires registration.....”
18.In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that
the valid adoption of both girl children had taken place on 11.07.2018 itself
and the petitioner and his wife have become adoptive father and mother of
both the girl children. Therefore, the registration of adoption deed is not
mandatory. In such circumstances, reasoning of the second respondent for
rejecting the request of the petitioner for issuance of fresh birth certificate to
both girl children on the ground that the adoption deed is not a legally
admissible document cannot be accepted.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
19.In view of Section 56(3) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015, the said Act or Adoption Regulations 2002 would not be
applicable when the adoption of the children have been made under the
provisions of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
20.The next question that arises for consideration is whether the name
of the biological parents can be deleted and name of the adoptive parents
could be substituted in the birth certificate as requested by the petitioner.
21.This Court in a judgment reported in (2020) 6 Mad LJ 390
(Viveknarendran and another -Petitioners), while considering a similar
request has categorically held that even after a valid adoption, the name of the
biological parents cannot be deleted from the birth certificate. A separate
column has been introduced under Form 1-A which are traceable to Rule 5 of
Tamil Nadu Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2000 which provides for
incorporation of the name of the adoptive father and adoptive mother along
with the name of the biological parents. This judgment has been followed by
another learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.36425 of 2024
(Dhasana Moorthy Vs. The Registrar of Births and Deaths Erode City
Municipal Corporation, Erode and another) dated 29.01.2025.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
22.Rule 5 of Tamil Nadu Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2000
is extracted as follows:
“5. Form for giving Information of births and deaths: ---
The information required to be given to the Registrar
under section 8 or section 9, as the case may be, shall be in
Form-1, Form 1-A, Form 2 and Form 3 for the Registration of
birth, adoption of child, death and still birth respectively, herein
after to be collectively called the reporting forms. Information, if
given orally shall be entered by the Registrar in the appropriate
reporting form and the signature/ thumb impression of the
informant obtained.
(2) The part of the reporting form containing legal
information shall be called as “Legal Part” and the part
containing statistical information shall be called as “Statistical
Part”.
(3) The information referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be
given within twenty one days from the date of birth, death or still
birth.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
23.Form 1-A is extracted as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
24.A perusal of Form 1-A clearly reveals that the name of the
biological mother and father have to be incorporated in Sl.Nos. 4 and 5. The
name of the adoptive mother and father have to be incorporated in Sl.Nos.7
and 8. In such circumstances, the request of the petitioner for deletion of the
name of the biological parents of the girl children cannot be accepted in the
eye of law. However, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to
issue birth certificate to both the girl children namely Ms.T.Kumutha and and
Ms.T.Malarvizhi under Form 1-A of Tamil Nadu Registration of Births and
Deaths Rules, 2000. After issuance of such birth certificate by the second
respondent, the petitioner at liberty to approach the third respondent to
include the name of the adoptive children in his service records.
(E).Conclusion:
25.In view of the above said deliberations, the order impugned in the
writ petition is quashed and the second respondent is directed to issue a birth
certificate to both the girl children under Form 1-A incorporating the name of
the petitioner and his wife as adoptive parents of the girl children along with
the name of the biological parents.
26.In fine, this writ petition is allowed to the extent as stated above. No
costs.
02.01.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No
To
1.The District Collector
Thanjavur District
Thanjavur
2.The Municipal Health Officer
Thanjavur Municipality
Thanjavur District
3.The Commissioner
Pudukkottai Municipal Corporation
Pudukkottai
4.The Section Officer
V.R.Section
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Madurai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
msa
Pre-delivery order made in
02.01.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 03:26:02 pm )
