Allowed

Ritvi D/O Pankaj Golechha, Thr. Guardian Father Pankaj K. Golechha and Others v. Central Board of Secondary Education, Pune Thr. Regional Director and Another

Bombay HC6 Oct 2021WP/3264/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Bombay High Court rejected arguments regarding school records but accepted the petitioner's claim for name change in C.B.S.E. certificates based on her Aadhar Card. Relying on Jigya Yadav, the court directed the C.B.S.E. to entertain the request within four weeks under stated conditions.

What did the court decide?

Directed C.B.S.E. to entertain the request for recording the name change in certificates and other documents within four weeks, subject to reasonable conditions.

Ritvi D/O Pankaj Golechha, Thr. Guardian… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

Judgment

wp3264.21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 3264 OF 2021

¶6

Miss. Ritvi D/o. Pankaj Golechha, (Minor), aged about 17 years, Occupation : Student, R/o.Katoli, Bamni, Post : Katoli, Tq. Ballapur, District : Chandrapur, through guardian/ father Shri Pankaj Kamalnayan Golechha.

¶7

Pankaj S/o. Kamalnayan Golechha, Aged about 40 years, Occupation : Cultivation, R/o. Katoli – Bamni, Post : Katoli, Tq. Ballarpur, District: Chandrapur.

¶8

Neha W/o. Pankaj Golechha, Aged about 39 years, Occupation: Household, R/o. Katoli – Bamni, Post : Katoli, Tq. Ballarpur, District: Chandrapur. …. PETITIONERS .

¶9

// VERSUS //

¶10

Central Board of Secondary Education, through its Regional Director, Central Board of Secondary Education, Regional Office, RLM Business Park, Sr.No.28/4/A, Old Kharadi – Mundhva Road, Opp. Bollywood Complex, Kharadi, Pune-411014.

¶11

Ballarpur Public School, Yenbodi, Tq. Ballarpur, District Chandrapur - 442701 – through its Principal.

…. RESPONDENTS.

Judgment 2

wp3264.21.odt

______________________________________________________________ Shri M.P.Khajanchi, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri P.S.Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Shri P.R.Agrawal, Adv. h/f. Shri A.S.Ambatkar, Adv for Resp.No.2.

¶16

CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

¶17

DATED : OCTOBER 06, 2021

¶18

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Sunil B. Shukre, J.)

¶19

Heard.

¶20

RULE . Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

¶21

consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner initially submitted that the claim of the petitioner No.1 regarding change of her name in the Central Board of Secondary Education (C.B.S.E.) Certificate is supported by the school record. But, upon verification of the statement, we find that such change is not at all supported by the school record as the School Leaving Certificate, issued by Khamgaon School where the petitioner No.1 studied up to 7^th Standard, discloses that it was issued in the previous name of petitioner No.1.

Judgment

wp3264.21.odt

Now, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that change in the particulars to be recorded in the certificates issued by the C.B.S.E. can also be effected on the basis of other public documents, such as Birth Certificate, Aadhar Card, Election Card and in the present case, as petitioner No.1 has already been issued Aadhar Card in her new name, the request of the petitioner for incorporating the change in the certificates issued by the C.B.S.E. ought to have been accepted by the C.B.S.E.

¶27

The learned counsel for C.B.S.E. submits that the C.B.S.E. is ready to consider the claim of the petitioner No.1 in terms of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav (Minor) (Thr. Guardian/Father Hari Singh) .vs. C.B.S.E., reported in 2021(7) SCALE 298 .

¶28

On going through the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court appearing in paragraph 171, we find that the claim regarding incorporation of change in the C.B.S.E. Certificates is duly supported by the public document, which is Aadhar Card. The Aadhar Card has been issued in the present name of the petitioner.

¶29

In Jigya Yadav (supra), two categories of such claim have been mentioned. The first is based upon public documents like Birth

Judgment

wp3264.21.odt

Certificate, Aadhar Card, Election Card and so on and so forth and second is when the request for change is due to the acquired name by choice at later point of time, in which case, there has to be a declaration given by a Court of law. Since the claim regarding incorporation of change in the C.B.S.E. certificate, made by the petitioner, is based upon a public document, it would fall in the first category as noted in paragraph No.171 of Jigya Yadav (supra) and therefore, we are of the considered view that such a claim of the petitioner No.1 cannot be ignored by the C.B.S.E.

¶34

Accordingly, we direct the C.B.S.E. to entertain the request of the petitioner No.1 for recording change in the C.B.S.E. Certificates and other documents to be issued/issued by the C.B.S.E. and allow the same subject to reasonable condition(s), which may be imposed by the C.B.S.E. in its discretion, in terms of the directions issued in the case of Jigya Yadav(supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of the order.

¶35

Rule accordingly. No costs.

¶36

RRaut..

Ritvi D/O Pankaj Golechha, Thr. Guardian Father Pankaj K. Golechha and Others v. Central Board of Secondary Education, Pune Thr. Regional Director and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritvi D/O Pankaj Golechha, Thr. Guardian Father Pankaj K. Golechha and Others v. Central Board of Secondary Education, Pune Thr. Regional Director and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukund S/O Pundalik Pahurkar Vs the Zilla Parishad, Nagpur, through the Chief Executive Officer and Others

Bhaskar S/O Janardhanrao Vaidya Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Planning, Mumbai and Others

Amateur Handball Association of Maharashtra, Wardha through General Secretary Dr. Suresh S. Bongade Vs Union of India, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, New Delhi through Chief Secretary and Others

Muzaffar Khan S/O. Mukaddar Khan Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept., Mumbai and Others

Chitra W/O Gajanan Deshpande Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Ravindra S/O Namdeo Pandit Vs Honble Minister Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Division, Mumbai and Ors.