Allowed

Prashant Ramrao Gaikwad v. the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Aug 2011WP/1241/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction to correct his date of birth from 29.02.1990 to 23.02.1990 in school records, citing the impossibility of 29th February in 1990. The court accepted the plea as a genuine mistake and ordered the correction within one month.

What did the court decide?

Correction of date of birth from 29.02.1990 to 23.02.1990 in school records to be done by the Board within one month.

Prashant Ramrao Gaikwad Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

(1) WP 1241.2011

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.1241 OF 2011

¶4

Prashant Ramrao Gaikwad PETITIONER

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS

¶7

.....

¶8

Mr. Govind G. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State.
Mr. V.R. Sonawalkar, Advocate for the respondent no.2
Mr. R.R. Mantri, Advocate for the respondent no.3
None present for respondent no.4 though served

¶9

.....

¶10

ORAL ORDER:

¶11

1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

¶12

Heard by consent.

¶13

2.By way of present Petition, the petitioner
seeks a direction to the respondent no.2-Maharashtra

¶14

State Board of Secondary and High Secondary

¶15

Examination for correction of date of birth of the
petitioner from 29.02.1990 to 23.02.1990.

¶16

3.It is the categorical contention of the
petitioner that in 1990, the month of February, was
only of 28 days and not 29 days.

¶17

(2) WP 1241.2011

¶18

4.Shri Mantri, learned counsel appearing for

¶19

the management also submits that the said date of
birth was incorrectly recorded and now the school
record of the petitioner is correctly recorded as
23.02.1990. It is not as if the petitioner is

¶20

showing wrong date of birth by couple of years, so as
to get some advantage. It appears that due to genuine
mistake, the date of birth is recorded as 29.02.1990,

¶21

when as a matter of fact there was no 29th day in the
month of February, 1990.

¶22

5.In that view of the matter, Rule is made

¶23

absolute in terms of prayer clause (B). The same
shall be done by the respondent no.2-S.S.C. and
H.S.C. Board within a period of one (1) month from
today.

Prashant Ramrao Gaikwad v. the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Ramrao Gaikwad v. the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Parwatabai Shankar Pamalwad Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Bharat Lotan Thakur Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Limited Jodtala Tq Dist Hingoli through Chairman and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Pranita Baburao Palekar Vs State of Mah and Anr.

Shri Durgamata Bahuudeshiya Sports and Educational Institutions Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Machindra Baburao Kakde Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.