Allowed¶28

Shaikh Sameer Shaikh Husen v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Bombay HC4 May 2026WP/101/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

school record correction; deletion of sub caste Pinjari; place of birth correction Jalgaon (Somnath) vs Somnath (Jalgaon); obvious mistake; Headmaster no right to change caste column; S.S. Code Clause 26.3 and clause 26.4; Full Bench Janabai Himmatrao Thakur 2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 : 2019 (6) AIR Bom R 565; Article 226; Muslim caste; Aurangabad Bench; writ petition allowed; sanction by Respondent No.2; four weeks compliance.

What did the court decide?

Directions to Respondent No.3 – Headmaster to delete the sub caste "Pinjari" from the petitioner's school record and to correct the place of birth as "Jalgaon (Somnath)" instead of "Somnath (Jalgaon)" within four weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; Respondent No.2 directed to accord sanction to the said changes. ¶28

Shaikh Sameer Shaikh Husen vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the sub caste "Pinjari", alleged to be wrongly entered in the petitioner's school record, should be deleted at the instance of Respondents No.2 and 3. +2 more

¶13

Court's answer

Respondent No.3 – Headmaster is directed to delete the sub caste "Pinjari" mentioned in the petitioner's school record.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's case is squarely covered by clauses 'C' and 'D' of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Janabai Himmatrao Thakur (2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 : 2019 (6) AIR Bom R 565), under which an application for change in name, surname or caste amounting to an 'obvious mistake' can be made even after the student has left school, and correction in the school record/school leaving certificate consistent with the General Register is permissible.

¶24

Key takeaways

There is an obvious mistake in the petitioner's school record, both in mentioning his sub caste as "Pinjari" and in recording his place of birth as "Somnath (Jalgaon)" instead of "Jalgaon (Somnath)", which needs to be corrected.ratio¶27
Respondent No.3 – Headmaster is further directed to correct the petitioner's place of birth as "Jalgaon (Somnath)" instead of "Somnath (Jalgaon)".ratio¶28
The corrections are to be carried out within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, and Respondent No.2 is directed to accord sanction to the said changes in the petitioner's school record.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226) before the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench (Nitin B. Suryawanshi & Vaishali Patil-Jadhav, JJ.), decided 4 May 2026. The petitioner, belonging to the Muslim caste, sought deletion of the wrongly bracketed sub caste "Pinjari" from his school record and correction of his recorded place of birth from "Somnath (Jalgaon)" to "Jalgaon (Somnath)"; his application of 9 October 2024 had been rejected by the Headmaster's communication of 12 October 2024 on the ground that the Headmaster has no right to alter the caste column. Relying on clauses 'C' and 'D' of the Full Bench judgment in "Janabai Himmatrao Thakur", 2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 : 2019 (6) AIR Bom R 565 (which permit correction of 'obvious mistakes' in school records even after the student has left school, per Clauses 26.3/26.4 of the S. S. Code), and on supporting records including the father's service book, the brother's school leaving certificate (both showing caste merely as "Muslim") and the petitioner's birth certificate issued by the Gramsevak, Gram Panchayat Jalgaon (Somnath), the Court held an obvious mistake existed and allowed the petition: Respondent No.3 – Headmaster was directed to delete the sub caste "Pinjari" and correct the place of birth to "Jalgaon (Somnath)" within four weeks, with Respondent No.2 to accord sanction to the changes.

{1}

wp101-25.doc

drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.101 OF 2025

¶6

Shaikh Sameer Shaikh Husen PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra and Others RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr. Y. M. Khan, Advocate for the Petitioner Mrs. V. S. Chaudhari, AGP for Respondent - State Mr. Ajinkya Deshpande h/f Mr. A. S. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent No.2

¶10

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, & VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. J.]

¶11

DATE : 4th MAY, 2026

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

By this Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks directions to Respondents No.2 and 3 to delete the sub caste “Pinjari” mentioned in his school record. The Petitioner also prays to correct name of his birth place as “Jalgaon (Somnath)” instead of “Somnath (Jalgaon)”

¶14

It is the case of the Petitioner that, the Petitioner belongs

¶15

to Muslim caste, however, sub caste ‘Pinjari’ is wrongly mentioned in the bracket, in his school record. The Petitioner is appearing for competitive examinations and contemplating

¶16

{2}

¶17

wp101-25.doc

¶18

difficulty, by application dated 9^th October, 2024 had requested Respondent No.3 – Headmaster to delete the sub caste “Pinjari” from his school record. The said application is rejected by the impugned communication dated 12^th October, 2024, stating that the Headmaster has no right to make changes in the column of caste. The Petitioner also seeks correction of place of birth, as in his school register, his place of birth is shown as “Somnath (Jalgaon)” instead of “Jalgaon (Somnath)”.

¶19

Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 and learned AGP for the State. Perused the record.

¶20

In support of his contentions, the Petitioner has placed on record copy of service book extract of his father Shaikh Husen Shaikh Abbas along with Aadhar card and school leaving certificate of his brother Jamir. In the Service Book of the father of the Petitioner as well as in the school leaving certificate of his brother Jamir, their caste is mentioned as “Muslim” and no sub caste is mentioned in front of their caste.

¶21

The Petitioner has also placed on record his birth certificate, issued by Gramsevak, Gram Panchayat Jalgaon (Somnath), Taluka and District – Jalna.

¶22

{3}

¶23

wp101-25.doc

¶24

The Petitioner’s case is squarely covered by clauses “C” and “D” of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in “Janabai Himmatrao Thakur”, 2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 : 2019 (6) AIR Bom R 565 which are as follows:

¶25

“C. Thus, in light of the above, an application for change in the name, surname or caste, either due to reasons / cause unnoticed before or even occurring subsequently, being errors which fall within the category of ‘obvious mistakes’, can be made, even after the student has left school in light of the language of Clause 26.3 in the manner as indicated by Appendix Six in the forms as prescribed in the S. S. Code.

¶26

D. For the purposes like admission to another educational institution, in cases of obvious mistakes as prescribed in clause 26.4, a change / correction in the school leaving certificate, so as to make the entry consistent with the corresponding entries in the General Register of the School is permissible, which in fact is in accordance with (c) above.”

¶27

There appears an obvious mistake in the school record of the Petitioner, in mentioning his sub caste as “Pinjari” and recording his place of birth as “Somnath (Jalgaon)” instead of “Jalgaon (Somnath)”, which needs to be corrected.

¶28

In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondent No.3 – Headmaster is directed to delete the sub caste “Pinjari” mentioned in the school record of the Petitioner and also correct the place of birth of the Petitioner as “Jalgaon (Somnath)”

¶29

{4}

¶30

wp101-25.doc

¶31

instead of “Somnath (Jalgaon)’ within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Respondent No.2 is directed to accord sanction to the said changes in the school record of the Petitioner.

¶32

[ VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ] JUDGE JUDGE

¶33

drp/wp101-25.doc

Shaikh Sameer Shaikh Husen v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Sameer Shaikh Husen v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pravin Alies Appa Gopal Gadappe vs the State of Maharashtra

Rohit Rajan Shinde vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivshankar Mallikarjun Kore vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Janardhan Bajirao Darade vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shabana Begum Khursheed Ali and Others vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Taterao Dhondiba Bamnikar vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others