03-01-2011 Shri Suhi! Otwani. counsel for he petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Pane! WyerfortheState/respundentNo.1. Shri Pankaj Agrawai, counsel or respondent No.24 Heard. This petition has been fiied by he petitioner aggrieved on account of non-correction of her-certificates of assing 10‘“ and 12" Examination on applications med in that reggrd; In view of the reply filed by the respondents, controversy is nuw‘narr w encompasso The only reason assigned b the respondent No.2 for not making corrections is that the relevant entri have not been certified by the District - Education Officer as required vide le er dated 11-09-2008 (Annextire P-7). Learned counsel for the petiti ner submits that the petitioner would move appropriateapplication now b ore the Frincipal for being sentto the District Education Offlcer for due and proper verification andcertification. Learned counsel for respond nt No.2 submits that in. case. such requirement is completed; the respo ent No.2 shali take appropriate steps with regard to corrections, as prayed , ln view of the submission ma by learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that on moving appropr e application by the petitioner, theDistrict Education Officer shall make ecessary verification and certification ’ on the basis of the records availab l and the same shall be forwardedto the respondent No.2 for/taking appr p riate steps for correction. as prayed by the petitioner. lt‘is mademc'l that the entire exercise shall be
