Delhi District Court
Sh. Jatin Singh vs C.B.S.E on 9 June, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANOJ KUMAR, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-
RENT CONTROLLER (EAST): DELHI
CNR No. DLET03-001328-2018
CS No.: 858/18
Sh. Jatin Singh
S/o Sh. Raju
R/o H.No. 232, Shyam Vihar,
E-Extension, Phase-I,
Najafgarh, New Delhi - 110043.
.........Plaintiff
Versus
1. C.B.S.E
Head Office
PS-1-2, Institutional Area,
I.P. Extension,
Patparganj, New Delhi - 110092
2. M.R. Vivekananda Model School
Sector 13, Dwarka, New Delhi.
School ID. No. 75924,
Service to be effected through its Principal/ Incharge.
......... Defendants
Date of Institution : 04.09.2018
Date of reserving of judgment : 09.06.2022
Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 09.06.2022
CS No.: 858/18 Page 1 of 13
Suit for Declaration and Mandatory Injunction
JUDGMENT
1. By this judgment, the court shall decide the present suit.
2. Succinctly stated, the case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff appeared in the examination of the Class 10th through his school i.e. M.R. Vivekanand Model School, Sector 13, Dwarka, New Delhi vide his Roll No.8209048 conducted by the defendant no.1 and passed the 10th class examination from CBSE. The defendant no.1 had issued Grade Sheet-cum-Certificate of the performance bearing registration no.D-113/75924/0036 in session 2011 to 2013. It is further stated that exact and correct name of the father of the plaintiff is "Raju" instead of "Raju Singh".
3. It is stated that inadvertently, father's name of the plaintiff was recorded as "Raju Singh" instead of "Raju" in the Grade Sheet-cum- certificate of performance of the plaintiff which was issued by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff after passing 10th Class examination. The father of the plaintiff requested to the school authority for correction/rectification in name of father of the plaintiff, but the defendant no.2 suggested the father of the plaintiff to approach defendant no.1. As per the directions of the defendants, father of the plaintiff got published his correct name in newspaper on 14.09.2014. A Gazette notification dated 04.10.2014 also got CS No.: 858/18 Page 2 of 13 published. However, defendants did not pay any heed towards the request of the father of the plaintiff.
4. Thus, on the above stated grounds, the plaintiff has prayed for a decree of declaration in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants thereby declaring the correction/rectify the father's name of the plaintiff from "Raju Singh" to "Raju" on 10th class Grade Sheet cum certificate of performance and migration certificate/mark-sheet vide roll no. 8209048 and registration no.D-113/75924/0036 issued from the board of defendants. The plaintiff has also prayed for a decree of mandatory declaration in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants thereby directing the defendants to correct/rectify in the father's name of the plaintiff from "Raju Singh" to "Raju" in 10th class grade sheet cum certificate of performance and migration certificate/mark-sheet vide roll no.8209048 and registration no.D- 113/75924/0036 issued from the board of defendant. It is further prayed that defendants be directed to issue a fresh certificate and mark-sheet after changing/rectifying the necessary correction in the father's name of plaintiff Grade Sheet cum Certificate of performance and migration certificate/marks-sheet of 10th Class of the plaintiff. CS No.: 858/18 Page 3 of 13
5. The defendants 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 CBSE 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 Notification dated 01.02.2018.
6. It is stated that application for correction in name of candidates/father/mother/guardians name will be considered only within five years of declaration of result. Defendant no.1 i.e C.B.S.E. has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of "Sajjad Barakat vs CBSE" in WP (C) No. 5967/2008.
7. It is stated that plaintiff did not move any application to CBSE. It is further stated that no cause of action has arisen of the purpose of filing the present suit and suit is liable to be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
8. It is stated in the WS of the defendant no.2 that defendant no.2 is not entitled to correct/rectify the name and surname of any student/parents. CS No.: 858/18 Page 4 of 13 The defendant no.1 is autonomous body and is a nodal agency, which prepares the curriculum for students and also is responsible for conducting examination of students upto senior secondary i.e. 12 th standard, throughout India. It is further stated that defendant no.2 has made best efforts and requested defendant no.1 to rectify and make necessary corrections in the father's name of plaintiff that was to be done by CBSE only. It is further stated that if defendant no.1/CBSE amends or rectify its record, the defendant no.1 has no objection for the same.
9. The plaintiff has not filed replication to the written statement filed by the defendants.
ISSUES
10. The following issues were framed in the present matter:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for ? OPP
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of declaration as prayed for ? OPP EVIDENCE:
11. In order to prove the case, plaintiff examined himself as PW-1. CS No.: 858/18 Page 5 of 13 He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/1. He relied upon the following documents :-
I) Ex. PW-1/A (OSR) is the copy of class X Marksheet of plaintiff.
ii) Ex. PW-1/B is the copy of Gazette notification dated 04.10.2014.
iii) Ex. PW-1/C (OSR) copy of the newspaper dated 14.09.2014.
iv) Ex. PW-1/D (OSR) copy of the newspaper dated 11.11.2017.
v) Ex. PW-1/E (OSR) copy of letter dated 17.02.2014 sent to CBSE by Principal.
vi) Ex. PW-1/F (OSR) copy of the letter dated 24.11.2017 sent to CBSE by Principal.
vii) Ex. PW-1/G which is original of letter dated 19.12.2017 sent to CBSE by M.R. Vivekanand Model School.
viii) Ex. PW-1/H(OSCR) copy of Aadhar Card of plaintiff.
ix) Mark-1 is the copy of office order of CBSE dt. 06.02.2015.
x) Mark-2 is the copy of letter sent to M.R. Vivekanand Model School by CBSE dt. 29.05.2015.
xi) Mark-3 is the copy letter sent to M.R. Vivekanand Model School by CBSE dt. 30.11.2017.
xii) Mark-4 is the copy of Adhar card of plaintiff's father.
xiii) Mark-5 copy of ID card of father of plaintiff issued by BSF, Ministry of Home Affairs.CS No.: 858/18 Page 6 of 13
12. The plaintiff's evidence was closed on 03.02.2020. The evidence on behalf of defendant no.1 was closed on 28.04.2022. The defendant no.2/School has not led any evidence in his defence.
13. 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:
14. The Issue-wise findings are as under:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for ? OPP
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of declaration as prayed for ? OPP CS No.: 858/18 Page 7 of 13 Issue no. (i) and (ii) i. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of declaration as prayed for? OPP and ii. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for ? OPP
15. Both these issues are interconnected, hence this Court shall discuss and decide them together. The onus to prove both these issues was upon the plaintiffs.
16. Plaintiff got examined himself as PW1. Perusal of his testimony shows that he appeared in class 10 th examination and defendant no.1 issued grade sheet cum certificate for the session 2011-2013. He further deposed that he made request to the defendant no.2 to correct/rectify his father's name at the time of filing of form for the admission in 9 th class. However, defendant no.2 did not rectify the father's name of the plaintiff on one pretext or the other. He further deposed that at the time of filing of form for examination of 10th class, the plaintiff again requested defendant no.2 for rectifying his fathers name, but defendant no.2 suggested the plaintiff to approach defendant no.1. It is further deposed that correct name of the father of the plaintiff is "Raju" instead of "Raju Singh". It is further deposed CS No.: 858/18 Page 8 of 13 that defendant no.1 issued a letter dated 17.02.2014 to defendant no.2 and on instruction of defendant no.1, the father of the plaintiff got published his correct name in newspaper dated 14.09.2014. A gazette notification also got issued on 14.10.2014. Thereafter, the plaintiff again approached defendant no.1.
17. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he passed his class 10 th examination in the year 2013 and class 12 th examination in 2015. He also admitted that CBSE has mentioned his father's name Raju Singh as per the particulars forwarded by the school. He also admitted that he moved an application for change in his father's name after passing class 10 th examination. Ex.P1/B is the copy of gazette notification dated 04.10.2014. Ex.PW1/C is the copy of newspaper dated 14.09.2018. Ex.PW1/D is the copy of newspaper dated 11.11.2017. Mark-4 is the copy of Aadhar Card of the father of the plaintiff. Mark-5 is the copy of ID card of his father issued by BSE, Ministry of Home Affairs. The marked documents not disputed by the defendants.
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 :-
CS No.: 858/18 Page 9 of 13
"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 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 CS No.: 858/18 Page 10 of 13 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).
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.
18. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that despite the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the bye-laws has not been amended till date.
CS No.: 858/18 Page 11 of 13
19. Thus, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the change of particulars in the certificate issued by CBSE is permissible as the same is based on public documents. Even otherwise, the formalities regarding publication in the newspaper as well as gazette notification has already been complied with by the plaintiff.
20. Thus, I am satisfied that in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the plaintiff is entitled for the correction/change in name of father of the plaintiff in documents issued by CBSE.
21. Needless to say that decision relied by the Ld. Counsel for the defendant no.1 does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Relief
22. Under these circumstances, it is apparent that 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 "Raju" and not "Raju Singh". Both the defendants are directed to correct the name of the father of the plaintiff as "Raju" in all the documents issued by CBSE to the plaintiff.
CS No.: 858/18 Page 12 of 13
23. The suit of the plaintiff decreed as to declaration and mandatory injunction in respect of correction in name of father of the plaintiff as "Raju" instead of "Raju Singh" in CBSE record.
24. No order as to cost. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room.
Digitally
signed by
MANOJ
MANOJ KUMAR
KUMAR Date:
(Manoj Kumar)
2022.06.09
17:15:42
SCJ-cum-RC, East/KKD
+0530
(Announced in open Court
on 9th of June, 2022)
CS No.: 858/18 Page 13 of 13