Patna High Court - Orders
Jitendra Kumar vs The Chairman,B.S.Exam.Board &Amp;O on 17 September, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.14925 of 2005
JITENDRA KUMAR S/O RAM CHANDRA SAH, R/O
VILLAGE MAHARORH PS-NATWAR,DISTT- ROHTAS
AT PRESENT C/O OM PRAKASH SAH, ADVOCATE
RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-SIDDNATH GHAT BUXAR,
PS-& DISTT- BUXAR------------PETITIONER
Versus
1. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD PATNA
2. SECY. BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA
3. THE HEAD MASTER, BALDEO HIGH SCHOOL DINARA,PO-& PS-
DINARA, DISTT- ROHTAS------------RESPONDENTS
-----------
For the Petitioner: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha,Advocate
For the BSRB: Mr. S.K.Mandal, Advocate
---------
2 17.9.2010Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner wants a change in the name of his father from Ram Chandra Prasad in the matriculation certification into Ram Chandra Sah. He submits that mistake had occurred in the matriculation certificate contrary to the name of the father of the petitioner in other records.
Request for such a correction has been rejected by the respondents and therefore this writ application.
The stand of the respondent, Bihar School Examination Board is that the matriculation certificate reflects the actual state of affairs based on the declaration made by the petitioner at the time of filling of the form and all the records carry the name of the father of the petitioner indicated by him before the Board authority. If the mistake actually was at the level of the petitioner, the Bihar School examination Board will not able to help the petitioner by making any change contrary to what is available on record. The Bihar School Examination Board can only carry out clerical mistake but not mistake of the kind which is -2- being prayed for by the petitioner.
There is material to show that the respondents have gone by declaration made by the petitioner when he filled up the form. In that view of the matter the Examination Board cannot be compelled to make alteration in the matriculation certificate whatever the circumstances explained by him now. Respondents have done no wrong in rejecting the claim of the petitioner.
This writ application is therefore dismissed.
RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)