Delhi District Court
Sahil Sekh vs Central Board Of Secondary Education on 17 April, 2026
CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
IN THE COURT OF SH. YASHDEEP CHAHAL,
CIVIL JUDGE-02, SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET COURT,
DELHI
Case No. : CS SCJ 135/2025
CNR No. : DLST03-000211-2025
IN THE MATTER OF :
1. SAHIL SEKH @ SAHIL MEENA
S/o MD Naster
R/o C-652, JVTS Garden Colony,
Chattarpur Extension, Chattarpur,
New Delhi-110074.
2. RIMSHA SEKH @ RIMSHA MEENA
D/o MD Naster
R/o C-652, JVTS Garden Colony,
Chattarpur Extension, Chattarpur,
New Delhi-110074.
3. SIMRAN SEKH @ SIMRAN MEENA
D/o MD Naster
R/o C-652, JVTS Garden Colony,
Chattarpur Extension, Chattarpur,
New Delhi-110074.
............Plaintiff
Versus
1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
P-2, 1-2, Institutional Area,
Patparganj, I.P. Extension, Delhi-110092.
2. SARVODAY SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL
Through its Principal
(Yashdeep Chahal),
Civil Judge-02 (South)
Saket Courts, New Delhi
17.04.2026 (Page 1 of 22)
CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
C-1, Safdarjung Development Area,
New Delhi-110016.
..........Defendants
****
SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND MANDATORY
INJUNCTION
****
Date of Institution of suit : 03.03.2025
Date of Reserving Judgment : 17.03.2026
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 17.04.2026
****
JUDGMENT
1. I may begin this pronouncement by quoting the words of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav v. Central Board of Secondary Education and Ors., (2021) 7 SCC 535, which succinctly capture the essence of the subject matter at hand. The Court observed:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet", said Juliet. This quote from William Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" is unarguably one of the most iconic dialogues in classical literature. It conveys that the natural characteristics of an individual are more important than his/her artificial/acquired characteristics. A poetic statement as it certainly is, it does not go in tune with the significance of a name in marking the identity of an (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 2 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education individual in his/her societal transactions. To put it differently, name is an intrinsic element of identity.
2. The plaintiffs before this Court have instituted this suit for the vindication of their right of identity. The present case involves a prayer for declaration of name by the plaintiff and consequential relief against the denial of corrected educational certificates by the respondents. Vide this judgment, I shall dispose of the present suit filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration and mandatory injunction against the defendants.
PLAINT
3. Briefly stated, the case of the plaintiffs is that the mother of the plaintiffs namely Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena was born and brought up in Hindu family and she was practicing Hindu religion and in the year 1997, Smt. Pushpa Lal converted her religion from Hinduism to Islam and changed her name from Pushpa Lal Meena to Parveen. It is further averred in their plaint that Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen got married with Md. Nashtar S/o Md. Kamrul Haq on 20.10.1997 in accordance with Muslim rites and customs and the said marriage was duly consummated and three children namely Sahil Sekh (son) was born on 29.06.2000, Siram Sekh (daughter) was born on 07.11.2001 and Rimsha Sekh (daughter) was born on 27.11.2003. All three children are plaintiffs in the instant suit.
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 3 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
4. It is further averred in their plaint that the mother of the plaintiffs namely Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen was subjected to mental and physical cruelties, abuses, harassment, torture and assaults by their father, and in March 2010, the father of the plaintiffs Md. Nashtar deserted the mother Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen and left the company of Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen as well as his children i.e. plaintiffs herein. Thereafter, the mother namely Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen filed a divorce petition being ML No. 05/2015 titled as Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen Vs. Md. Nashtar, before the Ld. Family Court, Saket, New Delhi and the said Court passed an ex-parte judgment and decree dated 19.08.2017, whereby it allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage.
5. After the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce dated 19.08.2017, the mother of the plaintiffs namely Smt. Pushpa Lal @ Parveen alongwith plaintiffs have re-embraced/re- adopted Hindu Religion from Islam and purification process (Shuddhikaran) has also been done before Bharatiya Hindu Shuddhi Sabha on 21.03.2022. Ever since the said Shuddhikaran process, the plaintiffs as well as their mother Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena have been practicing the Hindu Religion (Sanatan Dharam).
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 4 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
6. It is further submitted that the plaintiff no.1 has passed Class 10th from defendant no.2 School vide Roll No. 8226559 in the year 2016 and Class 12th in the year 2018 vide Roll No.9198215 and certificates/marksheet were also issued by defendant no.1 to the plaintiff no.1 in respect of Class-10th & 12th. The plaintiff no.2 has passed Class-10th from defendant no.2 School vide Roll No. 14132628 in the year 2020 and Class-12th in the year 2022 vide Roll No.14626297 and certificates were also issued by defendant no.1 to the plaintiff no.2 in respect of Class-10th & 12th and plaintiff no.3 has passed Class-10th from defendant no.2 School vide Roll No. 8239085 in the year 2018 and Class-12th in the year 2020 vide Roll No.14625880 and certificates were also, issued by defendant no.1 to the plaintiff no.3 in respect of Class-10th &
12.
7. It is averred that the plaintiffs were born from a Muslim Father Md. Naster and had initially adopted the surname 'Sekh'. The said surname 'Sekh' is also mentioned in their school certificates/marksheet of Class-10th & 12th. However, after converting/embracing the Hindu religion, the plaintiffs have renounced/relinquished and abandoned the use of their former/earlier surname 'Sekh' and have adopted surname 'Meena' (original surname of the mother of the plaintiffs), instead of Sekh.
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 5 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
8. It is further averred that the plaintiffs also got published in Gazette of India, July 2-July 8, 2022 in respect of conversion of their religion from Islam to Hinduism as well as change of their surname from 'Sekh' to 'Meena'. It is submitted that plaintiffs also got issued Schedule Tribe Certificate, Aadhar Card and Election ID in the new name of 'Sahil Meena' 'Rimsha Meena' and 'Simran Meena' respectively from the concerned authorities. Therefore, the plaintiff no.1 is now known by the name 'Sahil Meena' instead of 'Sahil Sekh', whereas plaintiff no.2 is now known by the name 'Rimsha Meena instead of 'Rimsha Sekh and plaintiff no.3 is now known by the name 'Simran Meena' instead of 'Simran Sekh. The plaintiffs have also made representation /application to the defendant no.1 and 2 for the change of their surname and religion in their school records i.e. Class-10th & 12th i.e. surname from 'Sekh' to 'Meena' and religion from 'Islam' to 'Hindu'. However, the defendant no.1 and 2 rejected the said application of the plaintiffs illegally and arbitrarily. The plaintiffs have been practicing Hindu Religion w.e.f. 21.3.2022 and have already converted their religion from Islam to Hindu and also relinquished/abandoned their former surname 'Sekh' and adopted surname 'Meena', and they have been using the said surname in their all records. The defendants herein despite repeated requests and visits made by the plaintiffs, have refused/declined to change the surname of the plaintiffs in their school records of Class-10th and 12th (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 6 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education and due to the aforesaid act and conduct of the defendants, the plaintiffs have been facing great hardship and inconvenience. Hence, the present suit.
9. As per the plaint, the cause of action arose in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants firstly in 1997 when Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena converted her religion from Hinduism to Islam and changed her name from Pushpa Lal Meena to Parveen. It further arose on 20.10.1997 when Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen got married with Md. Nashter S/o. Md Kamrul Haq on 20.10.1997 in accordance with Muslim Rites and Customs. It again arose in March, 2010 when the mother of the plaintiffs namely Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen was subjected to mental and physical cruelties, abuses, harassment, torture and assaults and in March 2010, when the father of the plaintiffs Md. Nashter deserted the mother Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen and left the company of Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen as well as his children i.e. plaintiffs herein. It further arose in 2015 when the mother Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @Parveen filed a divorce petition being ML No. 05/2015 titled as Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen v. Md. Nashtar, before the Ld. Family Court, Saket, New Delhi and the Hon'ble Court of Ld. Judge, Ld. Family Court, Saket, New Delhi vide ex-parte Judgment and decree dated 19.08.2017, allowed the petition of Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen and dissolved the (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 7 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education marriage and further arose on 21.3.2022, when after the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce dated 19.8.2017, the mother of the plaintiffs Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen alongwith the plaintiffs, re-embraced/re- adopted Hindu Religion from Islam on 21.3.2022. The cause of action further arose when the plaintiff no.1 passed Class- 10th from defendant no.2 School vide Roll No. 8226559 in the year 2016 and Class-12th in the year 2018 vide Roll No.9198215 and certificates /marksheet were also issued by defendant no.1 to the plaintiff no.1 in respect of Class-10th & 12th; and plaintiff no.2 has passed Class-10th from defendant no.2 School vide Roll No. 14132628 in the year 2020 and Class-12th in the year 2022 vide Roll No. 14626297 and certificates were also issued by defendant no.1 to the plaintiff no.2 in respect of Class-10th & 12th. It again arose when the plaintiff no.3 has passed Class-10th from defendant no.2 School vide Roll No. 8239085 in the year 2018 and Class- 12th in the year 2020 vide Roll No.14625880 and certificates were also issued by defendant no.1 to the plaintiff no.3 in respect of Class-10th & 12th. It again arose when the plaintiffs made representation /application to the defendant no.1 and 2 for the change of their surname and religion in their school records i.e. Class-10th & 12th i.e. surname from 'Sekh to 'Meena' and religion from 'Islam' to 'Hindu', however, the defendant no.1 and 2 rejected the said application of the plaintiffs illegally and arbitrarily. It again (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 8 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education arose when due to refusal of the defendants to change the surname of the plaintiffs in their school records of Class-10th and 12th, the plaintiffs had to face great hardship and inconvenience. The cause of action is still continuing. Hence, the cause of action is still subsisting and continuing.
WRITTEN STATEMENT
10.After institution of the suit, summons was issued to the defendants. The defendant No. 2 appeared before the Court and filed its written statement. In his written statement, Defendant no.2 has taken several preliminary objections. It is contented that the plaint is not maintainable in the eyes of law as no cause of action has arisen in favour of the plaintiffs to file the present plaint against defendant no.2. it is further averred that the change of the plaintiff's surname in their educational records is governed by the Examination Bye- laws, 1995. Remaining averments have also been denied by the defendant No.2.
11.Summons was also issued to defendant No.1, and Defendant No.1 was served at the given address, however, despite service, defendant No.1 failed to appear before the Court and file its WS. Accordingly, the right of the defendant no.1 was closed vide order dated 24.01.2026 and defendant no. 1 was eventually proceeded ex-parte.
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 9 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education REPLICATION
12.Replication was filed on behalf of plaintiffs, wherein they denied the claims made by the defendant No.2 and reiterated the averments made in the plaint.
ISSUES
13.From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed vide order dated 04.12.2025:
i. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of declaration in his favour thereby declaring that the correct surname of the plaintiff is "Meena" instead of "Sekh"? OPP ii. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of mandatory injunction against the defendants thereby directing the defendant No.1/CBSE to direct/change the surname of the plaintiff as prayed in prayer (b)? OPP iii. Relief.
PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE
14.Plaintiff No.1, in support of his case, has placed on record his affidavit vide Ex. PW1/A and relied upon the following documents:-
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 10 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education Sl. Exhibits/Mark Details of Documents No.
1. Mark PW1/1 Photocopy of certified copy of (Colly. ex-parte divorce judgment and Running into 8 decree of Pushpa Lal and Md.
pages) Nashtar.
2. Mark PW1/2 Copy of Sudhikaran Certificate.
3. Ex. PW1/3 Copy of class 10th certificate. (OSR)
4. Ex. PW1/4 Copy of class 12th certificate. (OSR)
5. Mark PW1/5 Copy of gazette notification for name and religion change.
6. Ex. PW1/6 Copy of caste certificate.
7. Ex. PW1/7 Copy of aadhar card.
(OSR)
8. Ex. PW1/8 Copy of voter id.
(OSR)
9. Ex.PW1/9 Copy of PAN Card.
(OSR)
10. Mark PW1/10 Copy of rejection letter from defendant no.2.
11. Ex.PW1/X Suit of the plaintiff.
15.PW-1 was cross-examined by the Counsel for defendant No.2 at length. In his cross-examination, plaintiff no.1 deposed that he did not remember the exact date when he officially approached the school and CBSE, but it may be August- September, 2023.
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 11 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
16. Plaintiff No.2, in support of her case, has placed on record her affidavit vide Ex. PW2/A and relied upon the following documents:
Sl. Exhibits/Mark Details of Documents No.
1. Already marked Photocopy of certified copy of as Mark PW1/1 in ex-parte divorce judgment and the testimony of decree of Pushpa Lal and Md.
PW-1 Nashtar.
2. Already marked Copy of Sudhikaran
as Mark PW1/2 in Certificate.
the testimony of
PW-1
3. Ex. PW2/1 (OSR) Copy of class 10th certificate.
4. Ex. PW2/2 (OSR) Copy of class 12th certificate.
5. Mark PW2/3 Copy of gazette notification for name and religion change.
6. Ex. PW2/4 Copy of caste certificate.
7. Ex. PW2/5 (OSR) Copy of aadhar card.
8. Ex. PW2/6 (OSR) Copy of voter id.
9. Ex.PW2/7 (OSR) Copy of PAN Card.
10. Already marked Copy of rejection letter from as Mark PW1/10 defendant no.2.
in the tstimony of PW-1
11. Already exhibited Suit of the plaintiff. as Ex.PW1/X in the testimony of PW-1 (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 12 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
17.PW-2 was also cross-examined by the Counsel for defendant No.2 at length. However, the cross-examination has no bearing on merits of the case as the school is not in any direct contestation with the plaintiffs.
18.Plaintiff No.3, in support of her case, has placed on record her affidavit vide Ex. PW3/A and relied upon the following documents:
Sl. Exhibits/Mark Details of Documents No.
1. Already marked Photocopy of certified copy of as Mark PW1/1 in ex-parte divorce judgment and the testimony of decree of Pushpa Lal and Md.
PW-1 Nashtar.
2. Already marked Copy of Sudhikaran
as Mark PW1/2 in Certificate.
the testimony of
PW-1
3. Ex. PW3/1 (OSR) Copy of class 10th certificate.
4. Ex. PW3/2 (OSR) Copy of class 12th certificate.
5. Mark PW3/3 Copy of gazette notification for name and religion change.
6. Ex. PW3/4 Copy of caste certificate.
7. Ex. PW3/5 (OSR) Copy of aadhar card.
8. Ex. PW3/6 (OSR) Copy of voter id.
9. Ex.PW3/7 (OSR) Copy of PAN Card.
10. Already marked Copy of rejection letter from as Mark PW1/10 defendant no.2.
in the tstimony of PW-1 (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 13 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
11. Already exhibited Suit of the plaintiff. as Ex.PW1/X in the testimony of PW-1
19.PW-3 was also cross-examined by the Counsel for defendant No.2 at length. The cross-examination of PW3 was on similar lines as that of PW2.
20. Plaintiffs also examined Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena as PW-4, in support of their case, she has placed on record her affidavit vide Ex. PW4/A and relied upon the following documents:-
Sl. Exhibits/Mark Details of Documents No.
1. Ex.PW4/1 (OSR) Certified copy of ex-parte divorce judgment and decree of Pushpa Lal and Md.
Nashtar.
2. Ex.PW4/2 (OSR) Copy of Sudhikaran Certificate.
21.Thereafter, evidence on behalf of plaintiffs was closed on 24.01.2026, and the matter was listed for defendants' evidence.
DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE
22.Ld. Counsel for the defendant no.2 submitted that the concerned defendant did not wish to lead DE and vide order dated 23.02.2026, DE was closed.
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 14 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education FINAL ARGUMENTS
23.I have heard the parties who argued as per their pleadings and the arguments are not being reproduced for the sake of brevity. During the course of arguments, it was submitted on behalf of defendant no. 2 that the school has no objection to make the necessary changes if so directed by this Court. However, the school cannot carry out any changes in the certificates issued by CBSE/defendant no. 1.
ANALYSIS & DECISION
24.In light of the evidence on record and on a careful appreciation of evidence, I may proceed to discuss the issues and deliver issue-wise findings.
Issue No. 1:
25.The first issue has been framed qua the prayer of declaration sought by the plaintiffs, to the effect that the correct surname of the plaintiffs is "Meena" instead of "Sekh". The declaration has been sought on the basis that the plaintiffs were borne out of the wedlock of Smt. Pushpa Lal Meena @ Parveen and Md. Nashtar. The said marriage took place on 20.10.1997 and prior thereto, the mother of the plaintiffs was a Hindu belonging to 'Meena' caste. After the marriage, she converted her religion to Islam and remained as such till the dissolution of the marriage vide decree dated 19.08.2017 passed by Ld. Family Court, Saket, New Delhi in divorce petition bearing no. ML No. 05/2015. Thereafter, the (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 15 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education plaintiffs alongwith their mother converted/re-embraced/re- adopted Hindu religion by undergoing the Shuddhikaran process on 21.03.2022. Ever since, it is the case of the plaintiffs that they have been practicing Hindu religion alongwith their mother. As such, no question has been raised insofar as the conversion of the plaintiffs from Islam to Hindu Dharma is concerned.
26.In order to reflect the change of religion, the plaintiffs changed their surnames from 'Sekh' to 'Meena' and the said change of name was incorporated in various documents of identity/official documents such as Aadhar Card (Ex. PW1/7, Ex. PW2/5 and Ex.PW3/5 respectively for the three plaintiffs), Voter ID card (Ex. PW1/8, Ex. PW2/6 and Ex.PW3/6 respectively for the three plaintiffs), and PAN card (Ex. PW1/9, Ex. PW2/7 and Ex.PW3/7 respectively for the three plaintiffs). Furthermore, the plaintiffs also declared the change of name in the official gazette and gazette notification to that effect is also a part of the documentary evidence led by the plaintiffs. Furthermore, the State Government/concerned Authority has also issued caste certificates in favour of the plaintiffs indicating that the plaintiffs belong to Meena caste in Hindu religion. The said certificates issued in favour of the plaintiffs are Ex. PW1/6, Ex. PW2/4 and Ex. PW3/4 respectively.
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 16 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education
27.It may be noted that the documents placed on record by the plaintiffs may not be disputed and the said documents have been proved in accordance with the law. The Written Statement filed on behalf of defendant no.2 states that the school has no power to change the names of the plaintiffs in the documents issued by CBSE or in the record of the school, without there being a declaration or order by a Court of law to that effect. As such, the defendants have not disputed the case of the plaintiffs and have merely expressed their difficulty in effecting any change in name in their documents in the absence of declaration by the Court.
28.In so far as change of name in educational documents is concerned, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav (Supra) squarely holds the field. In the said decision, the Court acknowledged the inherent right of an individual to change his name, the same being an element of personal autonomy of the individual. However, the Court acknowledged that the same could only be done in accordance with the prescribed procedure. The relevant part of the decision reads as:-
"Conclusion and directions to CBSE
192. Although we have discussed the broad issues canvassed before us, in the ultimate analysis the real dispute requiring resolution is about the nature of correction or change, as the case may be, permissible to be carried by the CBSE at the instance of the student including past student. As noted earlier, broadly, two situations would arise. ....
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 17 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education ...
194. As regards request for "change" of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE, it presupposes that the particulars intended to be recorded in the CBSE certificate are not consistent with the school records. Such a request could be made in two different situations. The first is on the basis of public documents like birth certificate, Aadhaar card, election card, etc. and to incorporate change in the CBSE certificate consistent therewith. The second possibility is when the request for change is due to the acquired name by choice at a later point of time. That change need not be backed by public documents pertaining to the candidate.
194.1. Reverting to the first category, as noted earlier, there is a legal presumption in relation to the public documents as envisaged in the 1872 Act. Such public documents, therefore, cannot be ignored by the CBSE. Taking note of those documents, the CBSE may entertain the request for recording change in the certificate issued by it. This, however, need not be unconditional, but subject to certain reasonable conditions to be fulfilled by the applicant as may be prescribed by the CBSE, such as, of furnishing sworn affidavit containing declaration and to indemnify the CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees in lieu of administrative expenses. The CBSE may also insist for issuing public notice and publication in the Official Gazette before recording the change in the fresh certificate to be issued by it upon surrender/return of the original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) by the applicant. The fresh certificate may contain disclaimer and caption/annotation against the original entry (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten) indicating the date on which change has been recorded and the basis thereof. In other words, the fresh certificate may retain original particulars while recording the change along with caption/annotation referred to above (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten).
(Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 18 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education 194.2. However, in the latter situation where the change is to be effected on the basis of new acquired name without any supporting school record or public document, that request may be entertained upon insisting for prior permission/declaration by a court of law in that regard and publication in the Official Gazette including surrender/return of original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) issued by CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees. The fresh certificate as in other situations referred to above, retain the original entry (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten) and to insert caption/annotation indicating the date on which it has been recorded and other details including disclaimer of CBSE. This is so because the CBSE is not required to adjudicate nor has the mechanism to verify the correctness of the claim of the applicant."
(emphasis supplied)
29.A perusal of the operative part of the decision categorically indicates that there are two possibilities when a request for change of name is made by a person. The first possibility covers cases wherein change of/in name is sought on the basis of public documents like birth certificates, Aadhar card, election/voter card, etc., and the second possibility covers cases when change in name is sought due to an acquired name by choice at a later point of time. The second category covers cases where there are no public documents to support the acquired name. As regards the first category, the Court held that there is a reasoned presumption in relation to public documents and therefore, such public documents cannot be ignored by CBSE if the change sought is backed by such public documents. The Court observed that taking note of (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 19 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education such public documents, the CBSE may entertain a request for recording changed particulars in the certificates issued by it. The same may be made subject to certain reasonable conditions such as furnishing sworn affidavits of declaration, indemnification of CBSE, payment of prescribed fee, etc.
30.In the second category of cases, where change of name is sought on the basis of an acquired name, the Court observed that such request may be entertained only after prior permission or declaration by the Court of Law and publication in the official gazette. In order to avoid any multiplicity or mischief, the Court also observed that in such cases the original certificates may be surrendered and fresh certificate may include a caption/annotation indicating the change, date of change and other details in the certificate.
31.On a careful consideration of the facts of the present case, it could be seen that the case of the plaintiffs falls in the first category mentioned above i.e. the cases wherein the change of/in name is sought on the basis of public documents. In such cases, the CBSE ought to have allowed the changes required by the plaintiffs on the basis of public documents and without compelling the plaintiffs to approach this Court for seeking a declaration. Be that as it may, the public documents on record such as Aadhar Card, Voter Id Card, Caste Certificate, PAN Card and Gazette Notification (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 20 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education categorically indicate that the plaintiffs have changed their names in accordance with the law and the change has been accepted by various statutory and State authorities. The changes have been reflected in multiple public documents which constitute the official record of identity of an individual. On the basis of the documentary evidence on record, I find that the plaintiffs are entitled to declaration to the effect that the surname of the plaintiffs is 'Meena' and not 'Sekh' as well as that the religion of the plaintiffs is 'Hindu'. Consequently, plaintiff no.1 is entitled to bear the name "Sahil Meena" instead of "Sahil Sekh"; Plaintiff no.2 is entitled to bear the name "Rimsha Meena" instead of "Rimsha Sekh"; plaintiff no.3 is entitled to bear the name "Simran Meena" instead of "Simran Sekh" in the educational documents of 10th and 12th standard issued by defendant no.1 CBSE and the record maintained by Sarvodaya Senior Secondary School i.e. defendant no.2. Issue no.1 is accordingly answered in affirmative.
Issue No. 2:
32.In view of the declaration in favour of the plaintiffs and in view of the entitlement of the plaintiffs to seek necessary changes concerning their personal identities in the educational documents, and in light of the decision in Jigya Yadav (supra), the plaintiffs are hereby held as entitled to a decree of mandatory injunction, thereby directing the (Yashdeep Chahal), Civil Judge-02 (South) Saket Courts, New Delhi 17.04.2026 (Page 21 of 22) CS SCJ 135/25 Sahil Sekh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education defendants to effect the necessary changes in the record.
Accordingly, defendant no.1/CBSE is directed to incorporate the changed name/surname of the plaintiffs in the certificates issued to the plaintiffs within two months from the date of production of this judgment/decree by the plaintiffs. Defendant no. 2 shall also incorporate necessary changes in the record maintained by the school so as to avoid any complications at a later stage. Needless to observe, let the changes be made as per the prescribed procedure and on payment of necessary fee/charges, if any. Issue no.2 is also answered in affirmative.
RELIEF
33.In view of the above findings, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. Parties to bear their own costs.
34.Decree sheet be prepared in terms of this judgment.
35.The present judgment consists of 22 pages and all pages bear my signatures.
36.File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by YASHDEEP YASHDEEP CHAHAL
CHAHAL Date: 2026.04.17
17:01:00 +0530
Announced in the open court (Yashdeep Chahal)
on 17.04.2026 Civil Judge-02(South)
(This judgment contains 22 pages Saket Courts, New Delhi
and each page has been signed by me.) 17.04.2026
(Yashdeep Chahal),
Civil Judge-02 (South)
Saket Courts, New Delhi
17.04.2026 (Page 22 of 22)