Delhi District Court
Sahil Khan (Minor) vs Central Board Of Secondary Education ... on 19 December, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANOJ KUMAR, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-
CUM-RENT CONTROLLER (EAST), KARKARDOOMA COURTS:
DELHI.
CNR No.DLET03-000540-2018
CS No.: 353/18
Sahil Khan (Minor)
S/o Sh. Babu Khan
Through his father/Natural Guardian
R/o H.no.415, Timarpur,
Lancer Road, Delhi-110054
.........Plaintiff
Versus
1. Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)
Through its Chairman
Shiksha Kendra, 2, Community Center,
Preet Vihar, Delhi-110092
2. A.G. Dav Centenary Public School
Model town, Delhi
Through its Principal
......... Defendants
Date of Institution : 17.04.2018
Date of reserving of judgment : 19.12.2022
Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 19.12.2022
CS No.: 353/18 Page 1 of 12
Suit for Declaration and Mandatory Injunction
JUDGMENT
1. By this judgment, the court shall decide the present suit.
2. The application under Order 32 rule 3 r/w Section 151 CPC of the plaintiff was allowed vide order dated 29.09.2018 and Sh. Babu Khan was appointed as the next friend of the minor plaintiff to represent him in the present suit.
3. The application under Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 CPC of the plaintiff was allowed and school AGDAV Centenary Public School, Model Town, Delhi was impleaded as defendant no.2.
4. Succinctly stated, the case of the plaintiff is that plaintiff appeared in the examination of class 10th through his school i.e. A.G. Dav Centenary Public School, Model Town, Delhi vide his roll no.8172177 conducted by the defendant no.1/CBSE and passed the 10 th class examination from Board of defendant no.1. Defendant no.1 issued class-X grade sheet- cum-certificate of performance bearing no.1037961 vide registration no.D117/65337/0098 in favour of plaintiff. It is further stated that inadvertently the name of father of the plaintiff was recorded as "Sajauddin CS No.: 353/18 Page 2 of 12 Khan instead of "Babu Khan" in class-X Grade-sheet -cum-certificate of performance of the plaintiff which was issued by the defendant no.1 in favour of the plaintiff after passing 10th class examination.
5. It is stated that father of the plaintiff moved application before defendant no.2/Principal of school dated 25.07.2017 for correction of his father's name. The school staff forwarded the said application to the defendant no.1/CBSE on 26.07.2017 and further advised that now the result has already been declared and they cannot do anything and advised the father of the plaintiff to approach defendant no.1. Accordingly, father of the plaintiff went to the defendant no.1 and orally requested to correct his name as Babu Khan instead of Sajauddin Khan in CBSE record of his son, but officials of defendant no.1 rejected the application of the father of the plaintiff which was forwarded by school and further advised the father of the plaintiff to approach the Court. Father of the plaintiff got published his correct name in Gazette of India Notification on June, 3 - June, 9, 2017 registered No.DL(N)- 04/0007/2003-05.
6. It is stated that plaintiff is a very ambitious and brilliant student and having bright hope for himself and he has to go abroad for study purpose, hence, it may cause a great hurdle to the plaintiff in case the said CS No.: 353/18 Page 3 of 12 rectification/correction in the name of his father in the records and certificates issued by defendant no.1/CBSE is not rectified at this stage.
7. The defendant no.1/CBSE filed written statement (WS) to the plaint, interalia contending that the Central Board of Secondary Education is a Society which was created pursuant to Government Notification. It is stated that Central Board of Secondary Education also known as CBSE is an autonomous society, which is fully self-financed. It is stated that C.B.S.E frames its own rules and is governed by them. C.B.S.E has its rules and regulations regarding change of name/candidate father name/candidate mother name. It is further stated that the suit of the plaintiff is not tenable in view of the amended Rule 69.1 (i) of the Examination By-Laws of the Central Board of Secondary Education and the amended office order dated 06.02.2015 and notification dated 26.06.2015. It is stated that no change in name/surname once recorded in the Board's record shall be made. However, correction in name to the extent of correction in spieling errors, factual typographical errors in the candidates name/surname, father's name/mother's name or guardian's name to make it consistent with what is given in the list of candidates (LOC) submitted by the school may be made. It is further stated that suit of the plaintiff is without cause of action and as such same is liable to CS No.: 353/18 Page 4 of 12 be dismissed under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Ld. Counsel for the defendant has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in "Sajjad Barakat Vs. CBSE" in WP(C) No.5967/2008.
8. Written statement on behalf of defendant no.2 filed wherein it has been stated that parents of the plaintiff had themselves filed the particulars in admission form viz name of plaintiff's father as Sajauddin Khan of their own in his own handwriting and the same particulars have been mentioned in the mark-sheet/Grade sheet and certificate of performance of the plaintiff.
9. The plaintiff has filed replication to the written statement of defendant no.1 wherein he denied the contents of WS and reiterated the plaint. ISSUES
10. The following issues were framed in the present matter:-
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to relief of declaration as prayed for ? OPP
2. Whether plaintiff is entitled to the relief of mandatory injunction, as prayed for ? OPP
3. Relief, if any.CS No.: 353/18 Page 5 of 12
EVIDENCE:
11. In order to prove the case, Sh. Babu Khan was examined as PW-1. He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A. He relied upon the following documents :-
1. The copy of Gazette notification dated June 3 to June 9, 2017 is Ex.PW1/1.
2. Affidavit dated 11.05.2017 of Sajauddin Khan is Ex.PW1/2 (OSR).
3. Copy of 10th mark-sheet of plaintiff is Ex.PW1/3 (OSR).
4. Copies of Aadhar card of Babu khan as Ex.PW1/4 (colly) and Copy of Aadhar card of Sajuddin Khan is marked as mark-A.
5. Newspaper times of India dated 18.05.2017 Ex.PW1/5.
6. Application dated 28.07.2017 addressed to Section Officer, CBSE Ex.PW1/6(OSR).
7. Application dated 26.07.2017 addressed to Principal Arvind Gupta, DAV Ex.PW1/7(OSR).
12. PW1 not got cross-examined and opportunity to cross- examine PW1 was closed on 04.06.2022.
13. The defendants did not lead evidence in their defence and their evidence was closed on 01.10.2022.
CS No.: 353/18 Page 6 of 12
14. This Court has heard the final arguments advanced by the respective counsels for the plaintiff and the defendants and the entire record is carefully perused.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE AND LEGAL POSITION:
15. The Issue-wise findings are as under:-
Issue no.1 & 2.
"Whether plaintiff is entitled to the relief of mandatory injunction, as prayed for ?"
"Whether plaintiff is entitled to relief of declaration, as prayed for ?"
16. Both the issues are interconnected, hence this Court shall discuss and decide them together. The onus to prove both these issues was upon the plaintiffs.
17. Counsel for the Plaintiff argued that the name of the father of the plaintiff be corrected from "Sajauddin Khan" to "Babu Khan" for all purposes in the interest of justice. It is further stated that the name of the father of the plaintiff has been written as "Babu Khan" in document i.e. Aadhar card. CS No.: 353/18 Page 7 of 12 Father of plaintiff got published his correct name in the daily newspaper dated 18.05.2017 and Gazette of India Notification.
18. Counsel for the defendant no.1 i.e C.B.S.E submitted that the suit is not maintainable as per Rule 69.1 (i) of the amended C.B.S.E. Bye-Laws, amended as on 25.06.2015 and 01.02.2018 which do not permit any change in name after publication of the result of the candidate.
19. Counsel for the plaintiff contended that the plaintiff has sufficiently proved his case and grave injustice would be caused to him in case, name of his father is not corrected from "Sajauddin Khan" to "Babu Khan" since document i.e Aadhar card depicts name of the father of the plaintiff as "Babu Khan".
20. PW1/Sh. Babu Khan has proved the copy of his Aadhar card exhibited as Ex.PW1/4 (OSR). He has proved the newspaper cutting Ex.PW1/5 and copy of gazette notification Ex.PW1/1. Perusal of these documents shows name of PW1 as "Babu Khan".
21. PW1 not got cross-examined and opportunity to cross- examine PW1 was closed on 04.06.2022.
CS No.: 353/18 Page 8 of 12
22. The main defence of the defendant no.1/CBSE is that as per their bye-laws, the correction in name of candidate/father/mother will be considered only within 5 years of declaration of result, provided the application of the candidate is forwarded by the head of the institution with the attested documents.
23. The another defence of the defendant no.1 is that CBSE only permits the change in the name of the candidate/father/mother before the declaration of class 10th result and the name should be in consistent with the school records.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in "Jigya Yadav (Minor) Vs. CBSE & Ors." Civil Appeal No.3905/2011 passed on 03.06.2021 discussed the entire bye-laws of CBSE and held the following :-
"171. 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 CS No.: 353/18 Page 9 of 12 name by choice at a later point of time. That change need not be backed by public documents pertaining to the candidate.
(a) 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. Thus, 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 office 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 CS No.: 353/18 Page 10 of 12 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).
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in para no.172 of its judgment directed the CBSE to process the application of the applicants/students on the same lines as mentioned in paragraph no.170 and 171 of the judgment until amendment of relevant bye-laws. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also directed CBSE to take immediate steps to amend its bye-laws so as to incorporate the stated mechanism for recording correction or change, as the case may be, in the certificates already issued or to be issued by it.
24. Thus, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, even if the stand of the defendant/CBSE is considered to be correct, still, the plaintiff is entitled for the change of particulars in the certificate/mark-sheet issued by the CBSE.
25. Under these circumstances, it is apparent that the plaintiff is entitled for the relief claimed by him. Hence, relief is granted in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants to the effect that name of the father of the plaintiff is declared to be "Babu Khan" and not "Sajauddin Khan". All the defendants are directed to correct the name of the father of the plaintiff as CS No.: 353/18 Page 11 of 12 "Babu Khan" instead of "Sajauddin Khan" in all the documents issued by CBSE to the plaintiff.
Relief
26. The suit of the plaintiff is allowed and decreed as to declaration and mandatory injunction in respect of correction in the name of father of the plaintiff as "Babu Khan" in CBSE records.
27. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by MANOJ MANOJ KUMAR KUMAR Date:
(Manoj Kumar) 2022.12.19 17:13:37 +0530 SCJ-cum-RC, East/KKD Announced in the Court today i.e. 19th of December, 2022 CS No.: 353/18 Page 12 of 12