Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Aparajitha vs The Union Of India on 14 June, 2019
Author: G. Shyam Prasad
Bench: G. Shyam Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD Se WRIT PETITION NO: 42969 OF 2018 Between: Aparajitha, Dio Sreedhara Kumar M, Age 16 years, Occ. Student Rep. by her Guardian/Mother J VN L Mythili, W/o M, Sreedhara Kurnar, Age 43 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o, Ne. 13, Vilaya Ram Apartments, Near Karanataka Bank, Santhipuram, Visakhapatnam District - 5300186, . PETITIONER AND 1. The Union of india, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Hurnan Resource Development, New Delhi. 2, Central Board of Secondary Education, Rep. by its Secretary, New No.3, (Glid No, 1630-A)}, J Block, 16th Main Road, Anna Nagar (West), Chennai - 600040 3. Praqathi Central School, Rep. By its Principal, Pragathi Nagar, Opp. JNTU, Kukaipally, Nizampet (FPO), Hyderabad - 00090, RESPONDENTS Patition under Article 226 of the Canstitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated tn the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may he pleased to issue Writ or Direction preferably Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order passed by the Respondent No.2 vide rejection letter CBSE/RO GMVCORR/REJECTION/2018/ 11377 dated O8-DG6-2018 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the law and consequently sel-aside the said rejection fetter CBSE/RO (MYCORR/REJECTION/2018/11317 dated 08-06-2018 and direct the Respondent No.2 to change the name of the Petitioner from Aparaiitha M to Aparajitha Mythill as per the Aadhar Card. IANO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Na.2 to reconsider the application for the change of name of the Petitioner in class 10 certificate dated 25-05-18 made through Respondent No.3, pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice, LANG: 1 OF 2619 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased fo permit the petitioner ta place on record these additianal docurnent as additional material papers inwy 42969 of 2078 Counsel for the Petitioner:SRL M. MURALI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: SREB. KRISHNA MOHAN, ASST. SQLICITOR SENERAL Counsel for the Respondent Na. 2:SMT. &. CHAYA DEVEL SC FOR CBSE Counsel far the Respondent Na, 3: The Court made the following: ORDER HOWN'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.42969 OF 2018 ORDER:
This is a Writ of Mandamus filed by the petitioner secking for a direction toa the 284 respondent-Central Board of Secondary Hducation to change the name of the petitioner fram Aparajitha M to 'Aparajitha Mythil' as per the Aacdhar Card.
2. The mother of the petitioner filed affidavit being the guardian of the petitioner stating that the petitioner is aged about 1G years passed her 10 Standard from 3 respondent-Pragathi Central School. She made a request to the 3° respondent institution with regard to the change of her daughter's name in 10 class Certificate from Aparajitha M to Aparajitha Mythil. The 2 respondent vide letter dated 08.06.2018 rejected the request of the petitioner stating that the changes have to be admitted by a Court of law with regard to change the mame of the candidate and publication of the result of the candidate. Being aggrieved by ibe same, the present writ petition has been filed. I
3. The 2° respondent has fled counter stating that the pelitioner has applied for correction of her surname vide Setter dated 25.05.2018 along with Gazette notification dated March 18- 24, 2017. The same was rejected on the ground that changes in the name or surname of candidates has to be admitted by the court of dew, and notified in the Government Gazette, before the publication of the result of the candidate, as per Rule 69.1 fi). The apphcations regarding the changes in ecandidate's name, mother's name, father's name and changes in name of surname of the caniidates will be considered provided the changes have been acmitted by the court of law and notificd in the Government Gazette before the publication of the results of the candidate. The petitioner is secking for change of surname from Apara] jitha Musti to Aparajitha Mythili, which is a total change in the surname of the petitioner, as stich, the petitioner is net entitied fer change of SUPTLAITEC.
4, The point for consideration in this matter is whether the petitioner is entitled for change of her name in the light of the amended Rule 69.1 (i) of the notification dated O1.02. 2018?
Bae ty
2. The existing Rule under 69.1 Gj reads as under:
"Change in Candidate Name, Mother Name & Father Name} Applications regarding changes im mame or surname of candidates may be considered provided the changes have beer admitted by the Court of Law and notified in the Government Gazette before the publication of the result of the candidate."
Q The arnended uje under 69.1 (i) reads as under:
"Change in Candidate Name, Mother Name & Father Name} Applications regarding changes in name or surname of candidates will be considered provided the changes have been admitted by the Court of law and motified in the Government Gazette befere the publication of the result of the candidate in cases af change in documents after the court orders caplion. will be mentioned an the document "CHANGE ALLOWED IN NAME/ PATOIER'S NAME/ MOTHER'S NAME/ QUARDIAN'S NAMIE PROM-<------- VO tad ON (DATED)---------AS PER COURT ORDER NQ-<----- ~~ PQATEDD ~2s2ssceneene 2"
?. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for 2"¢ respondent is that in view of the Rule under 69.1 (J, the total change in. the surname of the petitioner cannot be considered ag the petitioner is asking for change of surname from Aprajitha Musti to Aparjitha Mythili, Whereas, the petitioner's name was mentioned as Aparjitha M in the School certificate as per the List of Candidate (LOC), as such, the Board cannot change the name, which was printed on Board certificates as per the list of candidates whose names were régistered online as submitted by the concerned school.
8, Learned counsel for the petitioner has reed on cateria of decisions and argued that the condition in the above rule of obtaining an order from Court of law for change af name and getting it notified in a Government Gazette is impossible to comply with, as there is no defendant against whom a civil suit can be filer by the applicant for declaration of her right of change of name.
G, Learned counsel placed reliance on a judgment of High Court of Dethi reported in Navee & others Vs. CBSE! = and also placed a reliance on judgment of High Court of Delhi reported in RAUNAQ SINGH SAWHNEY versus CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION?, wherein CESE was directed to issue a repised Marks sheet of Class X to the petitioner, reflecting the name of his father as "Raminder Singh Sawhney" after surrender of his MOS dated JETT 2GH3 Won io} Nad SOLS dated AZ2019 certificate calreacy issued to him, showtg the name of his Jaiher reflected as "Ramincder & Sawhn en In another judgment of figh Court of Gharkhand at Ranch reported in Neelu Prasad Vs Central Board of Secondary Education & others?, the Court directed ta change name of the pentioner's daughter 'Avani' as 'A vant Prasad and her son 'Ayush' as "Ayush Prasad' and accarel moly ardered to issue fresh. {revised} certificates of Class X and XT} certificates to them within « Perad of four weeks from the date of receipt! production of a copy of the order, ln Vanika Vs Central Board of Secondary Education & others', the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Aad issued a rection to CBSE ta issue DMC of Class X to the petitioner by adding surname "Kansal" to the Heones of her parents, within a period of 15 days from the date af receipt of certified copy of the order, in Subham Vs Central Board of Secondary Education and others', wherein, the respondent-CBSE wes directed to make MECESSUPY Correction in the reme of the petitioner changing fram. Ssubham'? to 'Shubhame Thakur® in lus educetional certificates of Glass-& cned Class-XU within ¢ pertod of three months from the date uf receipt! production of a copy of the order.
In para -? of the judgment it was held as under :
"The Ligh court mey issue suitable rection wrder Article 226 of Constitution of irae, to render complete fustiee to a ailizen. in the case on jane the prayer for correction at the name af the petitioner in X Class Meriks AMP (0) Noh of 2016 dated 22018 TOWP Noi SES of 2048 dated SAP fe PN POU af BOT? dated O80 CA} 3 sheet/ certificate is denied on the ground of delay, it will nol resolve the issue. Thus, in. the interest of justice the name of the pelidener is required to he corrected in all educational certificates. More so, the corrections sought to be made is merely an addition of the sume, for which publication in the afficial Gazette of the Government af India vide Gazette notification No.5 dated 5.11.2016 has already been made"
/nder the circumstances, the respondent CRSE was directed to make necessary correction in the name ay the peuttoner from "Subham" to ""Shubham Thaler' as referred ahove.
10, On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submitted that Rule 69.1{i) has not been followed by approaching a civil court for change of petitioner's name, as such, the petition is Hable to be dismissed.
Ji. On consideration of the decisions referred above, and the facts and circumstances of this case, it is obvious that the petitioner has sought for change of her surnarne from Aprajitha Miusti to Aparajitha Mythilt. In this regard, a Gazette natification was made. The Gazette notification clearly shows that the petitioner intended to change her name from Aparayitha Musti to Aparajtha Mythili. There is no change in the main. name Aparjitha but the change sought was omy in the surname Musti to Mythili. The Gaxette notification was admittedly published in the month of March 18 to March 24 of 2017. There is no protest by anybody in connection with the said change in the Gazette notification. Therefore, in the light of the above decisions and in the facts of the r present case, it appears that the chan ge of surmame is not going to b effect interest of anybody, as none appeared for all most two years ever atler the Chavette publeation was made.
I. [tis also pertinent to note that the change was sought only in the surname Musti ta Mythilt. As per X Class Marks list, the surname was shown as Aparajitha M and she wan fed te change it to Apa ragithi Mythili, 'M ythil' is the name of the mother of the petitioner, 'Th erefore, there cannot be amy objection fram anybody for changing her surname from 'M* te 'Mythili', 13, No doubt, the © szette publication shows that the stumame Musti was changed as Mythili. As there was no objection from anybody since the date of notification and, since the chan ge SOugAL was onky in the surri ame, and not the full name of the petilioner, as Aparajigha M mentioned in CBRSIS institution was sought ta be changed as A parantha Mythili, the objections raised by the learned Standin g Counsel for the responder that the procedure under Rule 69. If) has not been followed, is not applicable in this case as it is only expansion of M as Mythili which Can be permitted in the Heht of the decisions re ferred above. {1 is also pertinent to note that Gazette publication was made in the Year 2017. TH now, ne abjections have beer filed by anybody though the change of name is 7 olfied in the Gazette to the public, even on this ground the pelltioner is entitled for change of her Sliname as she is not seeking for any ch ange m her main name Aparajitha, I4. In the result, the Wri Petition iS slowed directin e the 208 respondent-CBSE te effect the Hecessary changes in the X Class certificate and issue a fresh certificate within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall alsa stand closec].
Sd/- K. JAGAN MOHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR TRUE COPY// i age.
SECTION OFFICER One Fair copy to the Hon'ble Sri Justice GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD (For His Lordships Kind Perusal) Ta,
1. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union of india, New Delhi.
2. The Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education, New No.3, (Old No. 7630- Aj, d Block, 16th Main Road, Anna Nagar (West), Chennai -- 600040
3. OLR Capies
4. The Under Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Law, Justice and company Affairs, New Delhi
5. The Secretary, Advocates Association Library, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. G One CC to Sri. M. Murali Krishna, Advacate (OPUC)
7. One CC ta Smt. A. Chaya Devi, SC for CBSE (OPUC)
8. One CC to Sri. B. Krishna Mohan, Asst. Solicitor General (OPUC)
9. Two CD Copies.
PM he foe ~ : Bs. % u bh, pean bb yee pO me Mees ge 4, ate Ze pee THOGIZO18 awine the WE | WP No.42969 of 2018 Without costs.
oA us
a) a oO Al x HIGH COURT DATED