Names of persons/ places, surnames and the law: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
Change of name
A fundamental right
Rajesh Kumar Pandey, June 2, 2023: The Times of India
PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad high court has ruled that the right to keep a name of choice or change it according to personal preference comes within the ambit of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Allowing a writ petition filed by one Md Sameer Rao, Justice Ajay Bhanot quashed an order dated December 24, 2020, passed by the regional secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad (UP Board), regional office, Bareilly, UP, and directed the respondents to allow the application of the petitioner to change his name from “Shahnawaz” to “Md Sameer Rao” and to issue fresh high school and intermediate certificates incorporating the said change. The petitioner had challenged the action of the UP Board rejecting his application requesting to get his name changed in the high school and intermediate examination certificates.
The court ruled that the right to keep a name of choice or change the name according to personal preference comes within the ambit of Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression), Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution of India. “The authorities arbitrarily rejected the application for change of name and misdirected themselves in law. The action of the authorities violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), Article 21 and Article 14 of the Constitution of India and is in the teeth of relevant regulations under the Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921,” the court observed in its judgment dated May 25.
As per facts, the name of the petitioner was recorded as “Shahnawaz” in the high school and intermediate certificates issued by the UP Board in 2013 and 2015, respectively. In September-October 2020, he publicly disclosed his name change from “Shahnawaz” to “Md Sameer Rao” through legal means.
Thereafter, he applied for a change of his name from “Shahnawaz” to “Md Sameer Rao” to the respondent Board in the year 2020. The said application was declined by the impugned order (order under challenge) of the Board dated December 24, 2020.
It was the primary stand of the Board that relevant regulations contemplate that an application for change of name has to be filed within three years from when the candidate appeared in the examination. However, in this case, the application was filed seven years and five months after the petitioner appeared for the high school and intermediate examinations, respectively. The court did not accept the stand of the Board saying, “The restrictions contained in regulation are disproportionate and in the nature of prohibitions and fail the test of reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21 and Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The restrictions in the said regulation are arbitrary and infringe the fundamental right to choose and change one’s own name.”
Can be considered before declaration of result
HC junks minors plea to change name in his school records, January 29, 2017: The Times of India
The Delhi High Court has turned down the plea of a minor student seeking a direction to CBSE to change his name in all the records maintained by the Board and issue a fresh mark-sheet and certificate of Class-X examination which he had passed in 2015.
A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal has observed that as per the amended Bye-Law 69.1(i) of June 25, 2015, a request for change in the name can be considered only where the change has been admitted by the court of law and notified in the government gazette before the declaration of the result of the candidate. "...Since the change of the students name was carried out after declaration of the result on May 28, 2015 his request for change of name in the school records and certificates was rejected in terms of the amended Rule 69.1(i) (changes and corrections in name)," it said.
The bench was of the opinion that having failed to challenge the vires of the amended Rule, it was not open to him to contend that amended Rule, which disentitled candidates to seek correction or change in the name within ten years, is arbitrary and illegal.
The courts order came on the plea of the student who appealed against the single judges December 2016 order, which had also refused to direct the authorities to change his name. The boy appeared for Class-X Board Examination (All-India Secondary School Examination) conducted by Central Board of Secondary Education in March 2015, and the result was declared on May 28, 2015.
Thereafter, he got his name changed and a public notice was issued to that effect in the newspapers in June 2015 along with a notification in the Gazette of India on December 5, 2015.
On the basis of the same, he made an application before CBSE seeking change of his name in the school certificates/ records.
However, on February 3, 2016, CBSE had informed him that the request for change of name had not been allowed by the competent authority in view of Rule 69.1(i) of the Examination Bye-laws duly notified on June 25, 2015.
Aggrieved by the same, the student challenged CBSEs decision before the single judge. PTI PPS ABA HMP ARC DV
Names of places
Individuals do not have legal right to challenge nomenclatures of places
Dhananjay Mahapatra, July 22, 2021: The Times of India
Going beyond the Shakespearean “what’s there in a name”, the SC rebuked a citizen for approaching the court to seek change of name of a Nagar Panchayat in UP and said individuals do not have a legal right to challenge the nomenclature of a village, panchayat or a district, reports Dhananjay Mahapatra. The petitioner Rejendra Kumar Mishra was peeved by the UP government notification naming the governance body as Achalganj Nagar Panchayat to serve a cluster of villages. He had argued that it should be changed to Harha Nagar Panchayat as Harha was the most populous village under the ambit of the body. A bench of CJI N V Ramana, and Justices A S Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy asked, “What is your legal right in this regard?” Finding the response unsatisfactory, the bench dismissed the petition.
Surnames
Casteism discrimination a valid ground for change of surname: HC
June 13, 2023: The Times of India
New Delhi: It is permissible for an individual to change his or her surname to avoid being identified with any particular caste “that may be a cause of prejudice”, Delhi High Court has said.
The court also said that the change would not lead to the advantage of any reservation or any other benefit that might be available to the adopted caste/surname.
“The right to identity is an intrinsic part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. There is no denying the fact that the right to life includes within its ambit, the right to live with dignity, which includes not being tied down by casteism that a person may face on account of the caste to which they belong. Thus, if a person wants to change his or her surname, so as not to be identified with any particular caste. . . is permissible,” said the single-judge bench of justice Mini Pushkarna in an order on May 19.
The court was hearing a plea moved by two brothers challenging the letter issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) on June 1, 2017, refusing to change their father’s surname in their 10th and 12th board certificates.
The bench quashed the letter and directed CBSE “to forthwith carry out the requisite changes” in the 10th and 12th certificates of the petitioners to reflect the changed name of their father.
However, the court clarified that the change in the surname in CBSE certificates “shall entail only the change in their father’s name and not the change of their caste for them” to take advantage of any reservation or other benefit.
The plea stated that the name of the duo’s father in their Class 10th and 12th certificates issued by CBSE was reflected as Lakshman Mochi. So their father decided to change his surname from Mochi to Nayak due to caste-based “discrimination almost every day of his life”, it said.
He published a note in the newspaper about the change of his name by way of publication in the Gazette of India.
The court observed that the denial by CBSE for carrying out the requisite change in their certificates was “totally unjustified”.
It further said: “It is to be noted that the petitioners have every right to have an identity which gives them an honourable and respectable identity in society. If the petitioners have suffered any disadvantage on account of their surname and have faced social prejudices due to the same, they are certainly entitled to a change of their identity that gives respectability to the petitioners in the societal structure. ”
HC: Father can’t force child to use his surname
Abhinav Garg, August 7, 2021: The Times of India
The Delhi high court said that every child has the right to use the mother’s surname and a father can’t impose his will in this regard, reports Abhinav Garg.
“A father does not own the daughter to dictate that she should use only his surname. If the minor daughter is happy with her surname, what is your problem?” the court observed. It was hearing a plea by a minor girl’s father seeking directions to authorities to have his surname, and not her mother’s, reflect in the daughter’s ID documents.
‘All kids can use mom’s surname’
Refusing any relief, justice Rekha Palli declined to pass any direction and wondered why the father moved court for such a direction.
The court said every child has a right to use his or her mother’s surname and courts can’t intervene in such matters to force the father’s will upon a child against his or her wishes. During the hearing, the man’s counsel submitted that his daughter was a minor and could not decide such issues on her own, and that the child’s surname was changed by his estranged wife.
He claimed that the change in name will make it difficult to avail insurance claims from the insurance firm as the policy was taken in the name of the girl with her father’s surname. But the court dismissed these as apprehensions and termed the plea “misconceived”. It nevertheless disposed of the petition granting liberty to the man to approach his daughter’s school to get his name recorded in the school records as the father.
