Kerala High Court
Ananthu Ashok vs The Regional Officer, Central Board Of ... on 8 April, 2022
Author: Sathish Ninan
Bench: Sathish Ninan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 29182 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
ANANTHU ASHOK,AGED 24 YEARS
S/O.ASHOKAN.R., PUTHENVILA VEEDU, 14/1996,
MANCHANPARA, VATTIUYOORKAVU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 013.
BY ADVS.
K.SANEESH KUMAR
V.B.SANTHINI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF
SECONDARY EDUCATION (CBSE),
REGIONAL OFFICE, 1630-A, J BLOCK, ANNANAGAR
WEST, CHENNAI-600 040.
2 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HEAD OFFICE,
SHIKSHA KENDRA, 2, COMMUNITY CENTER, PREETH
VIHAR, DELHI-110 092.
3 ABDUL SALAM RAFI RASIDENTIAL SCHOOL,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, NETTAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 013.
BY ADV NIRMAL.S
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021 2
Sathish Ninan, J.
==============================
W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021
==========================
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2022
JUDGMENT
The request of the petitioner for correction of date of birth in the school records and the records of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), was rejected by the 1st respondent for the reason that the request is made beyond the period of three years stipulated under their norms.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Nirmal S., the learned standing counsel for the Board. Also perused the statement filed on behalf of the Board.
3. According to the petitioner, his date of birth is 21.02.1997, but has been erroneously recorded in the school records as 22.02.1997. The petitioner relies on Ext.P3 Birth Certificate issued W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021 3 by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, Ext.P4 Aadhar Card, Ext.P5 Identity card issued by the Election Commission, Ext.P6 Passport, to substantiate the same.
4. The petitioner completed his 10 th standard during the year 2011-13. He seeks for correction of the school records only at this distance of time. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the mistake was noticed only when application was submitted before the Kerala Public Service Commission.
5. The right of a student of the Board to seek for correction/change of the particulars in the school records and the certificates issued by the Board has been dealt with exhaustively by the Apex Court in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE [2021 (3) KLT 711 (SC)]. The situations were divided into two categories namely, where "correction" is sought and, where "change" is sought. Under the category of W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021 4 "corrections" the Apex Court included cases where the certificates issued by the Board were required to be made consistent with the particulars mentioned in the school records. In the category of "change" of particulars, two situations were contemplated- firstly, where by the records of the Board provide particulars different from that provided in public documents like birth certificate, aadhar card, election card etc. and secondly, a case of request for change of name consequent to the acquisition of a name by choice at a later point of time.
6. In the case at hand, the issue involved relates to "change" of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE to make it consistent with public documents and hence would fall within the first classification, of the second category. With regard to the said cases, the Apex Court observed that the legal presumption in relation to public documents as envisaged in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 cannot be ignored by the Board. It was W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021 5 accordingly held that, request for effecting such changes in the certificates issued by the Board, to make it in conformity with the public documents, could be entertained. It was further observed by the Apex Court that the Board is entitled to impose reasonable conditions while considering such request. The conditions observed by the Apex Court are:-
(a) An affidavit containing a declaration and an undertaking to indemnify the Board.
(b) Payment of fee for administrative expenses.
(c) The Board may in a given case, depending on the facts, require effecting of public notice and publication in the official gazette.
(d) Require surrender of the original certificate.
(e) A fresh certificate issued 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'.) W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021 6
7. While it is true that there has been delay on the part of the petitioner in seeking for the "change", the explanation offered by the petitioner is acceptable. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner's request is liable to be considered.
8. Accordingly it is ordered that, on the petitioner submitting a fresh application for change of date of birth through the fourth respondent school on complying with the requirements as above, then the first respondent shall consider the same in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court referred to supra.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN JUDGE sd W.P.(C).No.29182 of 2021 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29182/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE GRADE SHEET CUM CERTIFICATE OF PERFORMANCE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.M113/07236/0194 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED NIL.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.02.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION OF THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, UNDER SECTION 17 OF THE REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS ACT 1969 WHICH IS DATED 11.05.1999. Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAAR CARD DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA SHOWING THE AGE OF THE PETITIONER AS 21.02.1997.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA DATED NIL TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE PASSPORT DATED NIL SHOWING THE AGE OF THE PETITIONER AS 21.02.1997.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.29292/2021 DATED 24.11.2021 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT.