Delhi High Court
Bharat Sood Through Harvinder Sood vs Central Board Of Secondary Examination on 31 March, 2011
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
Bench: Chief Justice, Sanjiv Khanna
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA No. 311/2011
Bharat Sood through Harvinder Sood ....Appellant
Through Mr. Raman Gandhi, Advocate.
VERSUS
Central Board of Secondary Examination .....Respondent
Through Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ?
ORDER
% 31.03.2011 SANJIV KHANNA, J.
The appellant Bharat Sood, minor through Ms. Harvinder Sood, by the present intra court appeal has prayed for directions against the respondent Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE, for short) for amendment/change in the name of his mother in the qualifying certificate and the mark-sheet issued for the 10th class examination. The name of appellant's mother as per school records which was LPA 311/2011 Page 1 of 5 communicated to the CBSE and mentioned in the 10th class certificate, issued in May, 2010 is 'Kavita Sood'. The appellant states that his mother has changed her name from 'Kavita Sood' to 'Harvinder Sood' as per Gazette Publication dated 4th December, 2010. It may be noticed that the 10th class certificate and mark-sheet was issued to the appellant by the CBSE on 28th May, 2010.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant had got the school records amended on 14th May, 2010 and the name of the appellant's mother was changed to 'Harvinder Sood', which is before the issuance of the certificate by the CBSE on 28th May, 2010.
3. The aforesaid contention does not merit acceptance in view of the Bye-law 69.1 of the Central Board of Secondary Education Bye-laws, which reads as under:-
"69.1 Changes and corrections in Name
(i) No change in name/surname once recorded in the Board's records shall be made.
However, correction in the name to the extent of correction in spelling errors, factual typographical errors in candidate's name/surname, father's name/mother's name or guardian's name to make it consistent with what is given in the school record or list of LPA 311/2011 Page 2 of 5 candidates (LOC) submitted by the school may be made.
Provided further that in no case, correction shall include alteration, addition, deletion to make it different (except as mentioned above) from the LOC or the school records.
(ii) Application for correction in name/ surname will be considered only within ten years of the date of declaration of result provided the application of the candidate is forwarded with the following documents:
(a) Admission-form(s) filled in by the parents at the time of admission.
(b) The School Leaving Certificate of the previous school submitted by the parents of the candidate at the time of admission.
(c) Portion of the page of admission and withdrawal register of the school where the entry has been made in respect of the candidate.
(iii) The Board may effect necessary corrections after verification of the Original records of the school and on payment of the prescribed fee."
4. The appellant had appeared in Class 10th examination and the results of the examination were declared in May, 2010. The change of name was recorded in the records of the school on 14th May, 2010. The 10th Class certificate and the mark which has been issued as LPA 311/2011 Page 3 of 5 per the school records, as they existed before and at the time when the examinations held. In the forms, which were filled up for the examination, the name of the mother of the appellant was mentioned as 'Kavita Sood' and not as 'Harvinder Sood'. In view of the bar and the prohibition in the Bye law 69.1 quoted above, the appellant is not entitled to the change/amendment.
5. Relying upon the judgment of Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3577/2008, Dhruva Parate vs. CBSE & Anr., learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Bye-law 69.1 should be declared as unconstitutional and ultra-vires. It is noticed that no such plea was taken in the writ petition. Even otherwise, the validity of the said bye-law has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3771/2010, Ms. Jigya Yadav (Minor) vs. CBSE & Ors., decided on 20th December, 2010. The said judgment elaborately dealt with the said issue and has held that bye-law 69.1 is valid and has to be complied with. The said judgment was followed by us in LPA No. 783/2010, Bhagwat Dayal vs. CBSE & Ors., decided on 24th February, 2011 and it was held that no change can be made in the Class 10th LPA 311/2011 Page 4 of 5 certificate after the same has been issued and the same is in accord with the form which was submitted to the CBSE and the school records.
6. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the present appeal and the same is dismissed, without any order as to costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE March 31, 2011 kkb LPA 311/2011 Page 5 of 5