A school headmaster sought correction of his date of birth in a Class 11th mark sheet, applying 36 years after issuance. The court held that no right survives once the Board's limitation period for corrections has lapsed and dismissed the writ petition, reserving liberty to pursue civil remedies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPC No. 484 of 2024
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4/State : Mr. Keshav Gupta, Govt. Advocate
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
06.02.2024
1. Heard.
3. The briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner's actual date of birth is 15.10.1966, which is mentioned in the mark sheet of the Divisional Middle School Examination, 1981 (Annexure P-3), however, in the mark sheet of the Higher Secondary School Examination i.e. Class 11th, the date of birth is mentioned as
2
22.04.1965. The petitioner passed his Higher Secondary Examination in the year 1986 from the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. The application for correction was moved by the petitioner on 28.11.2022 and 06.12.2022. but when no action was taken, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition before this Court being WPS No. 8068 of 2023, wherein the Secretary, Secondary Education Board, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, respondent No. 2 herein was directed to consider and decide the pending applications of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within a period of 45 days. In pursuance thereof, respondent No. 2 vide order dated 28.11.2023 rejected the application for correction of date of birth on the ground that the same has been moved after a lapse of three years from the date of issuance of the mark sheet.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that earlier an application was moved before the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal on 28.11.2022 (Annexure P-5), but the petitioner was informed to approach the Board of Secondary Education, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, as the record was already transferred. He would further submit that the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 15.10.1966; however, in his mark sheet of Class 11th, the date of birth is mentioned as 22.04.1965. He would also submit that in the transfer certificate of Class 11th issued by the Mahant Raja Balramdas Govt. Multipurpose Higher Secondary School, Rajnandgaon, the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 15.10.1966 and in the mark-sheet of Class 8th also, the date of birth was recorded as 15.10.1966, therefore, the order passed by respondent No. 2 rejecting the applications filed by the petitioner for correction of his date of birth is erroneous and contrary to law.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that the application for correction of date of birth cannot be allowed after the period of limitation i.e., 3 years is over and in the instant case, the petitioner had made an application for correction of date of birth in the month of November-December, 2022 i.e., after a lapse of 36 years from the date when mark-sheet of Class 11th was issued in his favour. He has placed reliance on the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Urvashi Sahu Vs. Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, Raipur [WPC No. 2989 of 2018 , decided on 29.10.2018] , in which a
3
similar issue was involved for consideration.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
7. Admittedly, the petitioner had made an application for correction of date of birth in the month of November-December, 2022, after a lapse of 36 years from the date when his mark-sheet of Class 11th was issued in his favour.
8. In the matter of Sudhir Ram Bhagat Vs. Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Raipur and another reported in 2009 (3) CGLJ 103 , it has been held that when the Board's Regulations provide for limitation for moving an application for correction of date of birth, such prayer cannot be allowed after the period of limitation is over.
9. In the matter of Board of Secondary Education of Assam Vs. Md. Sarifuz Zaman and others , reported in (2003) 12 SCC 408 , it has been held as under:-
“10. Nobody can claim a right to have an entry corrected in a certificate solemnly issued by an education institution, that too the one enjoying the status of a statutory Board under the Act. The right of the applicant to have an error or mistake corrected is accompanied by a duty or obligation on the part of the Board to correct its records and the certificate issued by it. Not only it is a corresponding duty or obligation, it has also to be perceived as a power exercisable by the Board to correct an entry appearing in the certificate issued by it People, institution and government department, etc. - all attach a very high degree of reliability, near finality, to the entries made in the certificate issued by the Board. The frequent exercise of power to correct entries in certificates and that too without any limitation on exercise of such power would render the power itself arbitrary and may result in eroding the credibility of certificates issued by the Board. We, therefore, find it difficult to uphold the contention that the applicants seeking correction of entries in such certificates have any such right or vested right.
xxx xxx xxx
4
10. In view of the above, in the present case, since the time allowed by the Board's Regulation for moving an application for correction of date of birth has already expired, thus there is no right in favour of the petitioner to seek a prayer for correction of an entry concerning the date of birth.
11. The petitioner has to take recourse to the appropriate civil remedy as available to him under the law as observed by this Court in Sudhir Ram Bhagat (supra).
12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed subject to the liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge
amita
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application for correction of date of birth in a Class 11th mark sheet can be allowed after the Board Regulation's three-year limitation period has expired.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Urvashi Sahu Vs. Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, RaipurReferred¶5
Urvashi Sahu Vs. Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, Raipur [WPC No. 2989 of 2018, decided on 29.10.2018]
Sudhir Ram Bhagat Vs. Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Raipur and anotherRelied on¶8
2009 (3) CGLJ 103
Board of Secondary Education of Assam Vs. Md. Sarifuz Zaman and othersRelied on¶9
(2003) 12 SCC 408 · Who else cites this
Shiv Kumar Verma
State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, School Education Department
Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Raipur
Secretary, Board of Secondary Education Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal
Block Education Officer, Dongargarh
Rakesh Mohan Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
