Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 27 (0.36 seconds)The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
Subin Mohammed S vs Union Of India on 23 December, 2015
In the light of the decisions and, in particular, the binding effect of the decision
in Subin Mohammed's case (supra), we do not find any merit in this appeal
seeking reversal of the judgment made in W.P.(C) No.21357 of 2019 dated
7.8.2019.
Board Of Secondary Education Of Assam vs Md. Sarifuz Zaman And Ors on 19 December, 2003
40. In all these cases, there is delay on the part of the petitioners
in approaching CBSE, which cannot be lightly condoned. Taking cue
from Sarifuz Zaman (supra), they have virtually slept over their rights.
But failure to exercise jurisdiction will result in injustice to the
petitioners. Such writ petitions can therefore be entertained only on
imposing cost on the petitioners, which we fix at Rs.5,000/- .
The Registration Of Births And Deaths Act, 1969
Smt Somwati Bai vs Raghuveer Yadav on 27 February, 2018
"When it is evident that a wrong date of birth is incorporated in
the school register and mark sheet, it requires to be corrected, failing
which the applicants will loose their opportunity for further studies
abroad. They also relied upon the Division Bench judgment dated
5/8/2009 of this Court in WA No.1948/2008 (CBSE v. Rahul) and
connected cases, Manoj Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi
[(2010) 11 SCC 702], Arun v. Central Board of Secondary Education
(2010 (1) KLT 960) and Sreeraj R.Nath v. Central Board of Secondary
Education (2013 (2) KLT 430) to substantiate their contention that the
CBSE can be directed to correct the date of birth in the mark sheet
despite the limitation of time.
Manoj Kumar vs Govt.Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 26 July, 2010
"When it is evident that a wrong date of birth is incorporated in
the school register and mark sheet, it requires to be corrected, failing
which the applicants will loose their opportunity for further studies
abroad. They also relied upon the Division Bench judgment dated
5/8/2009 of this Court in WA No.1948/2008 (CBSE v. Rahul) and
connected cases, Manoj Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi
[(2010) 11 SCC 702], Arun v. Central Board of Secondary Education
(2010 (1) KLT 960) and Sreeraj R.Nath v. Central Board of Secondary
Education (2013 (2) KLT 430) to substantiate their contention that the
CBSE can be directed to correct the date of birth in the mark sheet
despite the limitation of time.
Sreeraj.R.Nath vs The Central Board Of Secondary ... on 19 April, 1990
"When it is evident that a wrong date of birth is incorporated in
the school register and mark sheet, it requires to be corrected, failing
which the applicants will loose their opportunity for further studies
abroad. They also relied upon the Division Bench judgment dated
5/8/2009 of this Court in WA No.1948/2008 (CBSE v. Rahul) and
connected cases, Manoj Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi
[(2010) 11 SCC 702], Arun v. Central Board of Secondary Education
(2010 (1) KLT 960) and Sreeraj R.Nath v. Central Board of Secondary
Education (2013 (2) KLT 430) to substantiate their contention that the
CBSE can be directed to correct the date of birth in the mark sheet
despite the limitation of time.
Cidco vs Vasudha Gorakhnath Mandevlekar on 15 May, 2009
Reference is also made to the judgment
in Cidco v. Vasudha Gorakhnath Mandevlekar [(2009) 7 SCC 283], for
the proposition that the Deaths and Births Register maintained by the
statutory authorities raises a presumption of correctness which would
prevail over an entry made in the school register especially when there
W.A.No.863 OF 2020
21
is no evidence to show that the same was recorded at the instance of
the guardian of the minor.
Birad Mal Singhvi vs Anand Purohit on 2 August, 1988
Reliance is placed on Birad Mal Singhvi v.
Anand Purohit (AIR 1988 SC 1796) for the proposition that the entry
of date of birth in the school admission register is not conclusive.