Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Miss Akshita Tikmani (Minor) vs Central Board Of Secondary &Anr; on 21 September, 2016
S.B. CWP No. 4478/2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORDER
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4478/2016
Miss Akshita Tikmani (Minor) vs. The Central Board
of Secondary Education & Anr.
Date of order: 21st September, 2016.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Ms. Manjeet Kaur, for the petitioner.
Mr. M.S. Raghav, for the respondents.
The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying that the action of the respondent Central Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter called as 'CBSE') to reject application of the petitioner for change of surname in the admit card, record of the CBSE and certificate issued, be set aside.
It is pleaded in the writ petition that the petitioner at the time of filing of the writ petition was student of Xth Standard and was pursuing her studies at Sanskar School, Vishwamitra Marg, Sirsi Road, Jaipur. It is stated that earlier thereto, the petitioner was student of Schram Academy, Maduravoyal, Chennai. The petitioner is stated to have studied there till March, 2014. It is stated that the petitioner due to family circumstances had to shift to Jaipur and mother of the petitioner had applied for school leaving certificate from Schram Academy, Maduravoyal, Chennai. Thereafter, the petitioner took admission in IX standard with respondent no.2 i.e. Sanskar School, Vishwamitra Marg, Sirsi Road, Jaipur. The petitioner was promoted to X standard and to take Board examination, the petitioner desired that her surname be changed from Tikmani to Aggarwal, as Tikmani is a sub-caste under the Tayal Gotra of Aggarwal community. It is stated that the application was forwarded by the school management and CBSE has not accepted the prayer of the petitioner for change of surname from Tikmani to Aggarwal.
In pursuance of notice issued, CBSE has filed the reply. In the preliminary objection, it is stated that the petitioner submitted a copy of S.B. CWP No. 4478/2016 2 the Gazetted Notification, newspaper cutting and affidavit duly attested by Tehsildar. It is stated that as per rule 69.1, w.e.f., 25.6.2015, correction can be permitted within a period of one year. It is stated that the petitioner had filed no application with the CBSE for correction of her surname.
So far as first objection of the learned counsel for the respondent is concerned, that the petitioner because of limitation is barred to approach the respondent after one year, the said argument is no longer available to the respondent. This Court in Virendra Kumar Meel vs. UOI & Ors, SBCWP No.13110/2015, decided on 14.9.2015, relying upon the judgment rendered by Single Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Sunil Kumar Sharma vs. UOI & Ors., CWP No. 11342 of 2015, decided on 10.7.2015, has already held that those candidates who had appeared before the amendment of the rule on 25.6.2015, are to be governed by the old rules. It will be apposite here reproduce following portion from the judgment rendered by this Court, as under:-
"Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment rendered by the Single Judge of Punjab & Haryana High Court in Sunil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India & Ors., CWP No.11342 of 2015 decided on 10.07.2015 wherein it was held as under:-
"After hearing learned counsel for the parties and examining the available record, I am of the considered opinion that the amended Rule 69.1(ii), notified on 25.06.2015, would not be applicable to the case of the petitioner as it would operate prospectively from the date of notification and the decision in regard to the case of the petitioner was taken by the respondents on 06.05.2015, when the amended Rule 69.1(ii) was not in existence.
Thus, the petitioner is well within his right to seek the correction in the spelling of his father's name in which alphabet `A' has been omitted to be typed by the clerk of the school at the time of filling of "LOC".
In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present writ petition is hereby allowed and the respondents no.2 and 3 are directed to issue fresh certificate of 10+2 to the petitioner by correctly mentioning his father's name as "DHARAM PAL SHARMA". The certificate be issued to the petitioner forthwith as it is required by him for tendering before the Air Force authorities, otherwise the petitioner may loose his job to which he has already been selected. "
Shri Virendra Lodha has very fairly admitted that besides Punjab & Haryana High Court, Delhi High Court has also taken a similar view. However, he has S.B. CWP No. 4478/2016 3 contended that the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court has been made subject matter of Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Shri Lodha has also very fairly admitted that decision rendered by Punjab & Haryana High Court and Delhi High Court have not been stayed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that the decision in Sunil Kumar Sharma (supra) holds the field as on today. Even otherwise, I am also of the considered opinion that the amended rule cannot be applied retrospectively. Therefore, those candidates who had appeared before amendment of the rule on 25.6.2015 shall be governed by the old rules/bye-laws and qua them typographical error can be corrected within ten years from the date of declaration of the result."
In view of judgment rendered by this court in Virendra Kumar Meel's case (supra), first objection raised by the respondent is overruled.
So far second objection raised by the respondent, that the petitioner had not approached CBSE, the present petition is disposed of, by issuing direction that in case the petitioner files an appropriate application before CBSE through her school the respondent no.2 within fifteen days from today, a decision thereupon shall be taken by the respondent CBSE within a period of one month, by applying old rules before the introduction of amendment on 25.6.2015.
Needless to say, upon submission of the Gazette Notification, newspaper cutting and affidavit of the petitioner attested by the Tehsildar, school shall correct its record before forwarding the application to the respondent.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA), J.
Mak/-
145