Dismissed¶32

Ranno Begam v. State of Chhattisgarh

Education – Correction of student's name in school records

Chhattisgarh HC7 Dec 2025WPC/28/2023

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur (single judge, Parth Prateem Sahu, J.), WPC No. 28 of 2023, decided 08/12/2025 (NAFR). Mother's writ petition for correction of minor daughter's name in school records/Dakhil Kharij Register (Naziya vs Ku. Sonam Sharma) involving mismatched parentage and caste entries in Class 2 mark-sheet; RTE Act 2009 Sections 3 & 5 invoked regarding admission without transfer certificate; court held disputed facts require civil adjudication on evidence; petition dismissed with liberty to sue in Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for redressal of the grievance raised in the writ petition. ¶32

Ranno Begam Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for redressal of the grievance raised in the writ petition.

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to correct her daughter's name to 'Naziya' from 'Ku. Sonam Sharma' in the school records (Dakhil Kharij Register/mark-sheet).

¶21

Court's answer

Since one mark-sheet records the student as Ku. Sonam Sharma, father Mahesh Sharma, mother Rani Sharma and caste Bramhin, disputed questions of fact are involved which can only be decided by a court of competent civil jurisdiction on the basis of evidence.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

No good ground exists to grant the relief prayed for in the writ petition; accordingly the writ petition is dismissed, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for redressal of the grievance.

¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Education — Correction of student's name in school records — Writ petition by mother seeking mandamus to correct daughter's recorded name from 'Ku. Sonam Sharma' to 'Naziya' in Dakhil Kharij Register/mark-sheet — Child originally admitted in Class 1 as Naziya; while admitted in Class 2 at Government Primary School, Chilhatikala (District Balod), name recorded as Ku. Sonam Sharma with different parentage and caste; readmitted in Class 3 at Bhilai under the same name — Class 2 mark-sheet (Annexure P/5) shows name Ku. Sonam Sharma, father Mahesh Sharma, mother Rani Sharma, caste Bramhin, whereas birth certificate and Class 1 mark-sheet show Naziya with parents Abdul Rafique/Ranno Begum — State relied on Sections 3 & 5 of the RTE Act, 2009 to contend no irregularity by school officials and that change of name would alter religion/caste of the student — Held: disputed questions of fact are involved, decidable only by a court of competent civil jurisdiction on evidence; no ground made out for writ relief; petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Civil Court.

2025:CGHC:59582

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 28 of 2023

¶6

1 - Ranno Begam W/o Abdul Rafik Aged About 32 Years Caste Musalman, R/o Ward No. 12, Ramnagar, Muktidham Camp-1 Supela Bhilai, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya Nahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan, First Floor, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - District Education Officer Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - District Education Officer Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶13

5 - Abdul Rafik S/o Abdul Riyaz, Aged About 39 Years Caste- Musalman, R/o Fauji Nagar, Near State Bank Of India, Housing Board, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.)

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr. Mirza Hafeez Baig, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4/State : Mr. Rishab Bisen, Panel Lawyer

¶16

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶17

ORDER ON BOARD

¶18

08/12/2025

¶19

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

¶20

¶21

“10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, order or strictly direction to the respondent authority to correct the name of daughter of the petitioner to Naziya from present name on the basis of the particular of the Dakhil Kharij Register of Class - 1^st within stipulated time, in the interest of justice.

¶22

10.2 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that daughter of the petitioner by name Naziya was initially admitted at Vasuki School, Kailash Nagar, Zone – 2, Bhilai in Class – 1. However, he submits that the petitioner was not in a position to provide education to her daughter and therefore, her daughter was sent to Kiran Sharma who got her admitted in Class – 2 at Government Primary School, Chilhatikala, Block – Dondi-Lohara, District – Balod and while getting her daughter admitted at Government School, Chilhatikala, to avoid any implication with respect to the religion of the child, she got her name recorded as Ku. Sonam Sharma. After 01 year, in Class – 3, the petitioner got her daughter admitted in school at Government Primary School, Housing Board, Bhilai. He contended that at the time of admission in Class – 3, the petitioner became aware of the name of her daughter as Naziya wrongly mentioned in the mark-sheet of Class – 2. However, at the advise of the school staff and other officials, to avoid lapse of one year, she got her daughter admitted in the new school with same name as Ku. Sonam Sharma which is continuing till date.

¶24

He further submits that the petitioner submitted an application before the District Education Officer, Durg along with an affidavit, however, the District Education Officer has not taken cognizance of the application stating that the wrong entry of the name in the record is made in the school within the jurisdiction of District Education Officer, Balod. He also contended that the affidavit of Smt. Kiran Sharma is also filed wherein, she admitted that Ku. Sonam Sharma who is daughter of her real brother,

¶25

¶26

who had subsequently changed his caste and therefore, while admitting the girl child i.e. Naziya, she recorded her name as Ku. Sonam Sharma. The petitioner and her child may not be made to suffer due to the error or irregularity committed by the staff of the School Education Department.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State opposes the submission of counsel for the petitioner and would submit that according to Section 3 & 5 of the Right to Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the Act, 2009), there is no precondition for submitting the transfer certificate while admitting the student in a school aged about 6 to 14 years. He contended that according to his instructions, at the time of admission, guardian of the student have recorded the name of the student as Ku. Sonam Sharma, D/o. Mahesh Sharma and have given assurance that he will submit the transfer certificate at later point of time. However, after completion of the academic session, she withdrew Ku. Sonam Sharma from the school and as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, she was admitted in Government Primary School, Housing Board, Bhilai, District – Durg. He contended that no irregularity has been committed by the officials of the Government Primary School, Chilhatikala. In view of the specific provision under the Act, 2009.

¶28

He contended that it is not a case of typographical error in recording the name, but for the name as mentioned in the mark-sheet of Class – 2 and which is continuing till date, name of the child is Ku. Sonam Sharma and from which, it reflects that she belongs to the Bramhin Caste of Hindu Religion and if the name is changed, it will not only change the name of daughter of the petitioner, but will also change the religion of the student.

¶29

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed on record.

¶30

¶31

From perusal of the documents placed on record along with the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has filed a birth-certificate stated to be issued in the month of August, 2021 on which, the date of registration of birth-certificate is dated 09.02.2009. The name of the child is mentioned as Naziya showing the date of birth as 09.01.2009. Petitioner has also enclosed the mark-sheet of Class - 1 showing the name of the student as ‘Naziya’, Father’s name - Abdul Rafique, Mother’s name – Ranno Begum (petitioner). Class – 2 mark-sheet issued by the Government Primary School, Chilhatikala is filed as Annexure P/5 showing the name of student as Ku. Sonam Sharma, Father’s name – Mahesh Sharma, Mother’s name – Rani Sharma, Caste – Bramhin and according to the submission of counsel for the petitioner, the child Ku. Sonam Sharma/student has withdrawn her name from the school at Chilhatikala and got her admitted in Government Primary School, Housing Board, Bhilai, District – Durg with the same name which according to the submission is of the year 2017. The student was admitted in Class – 3 by none other than the petitioner i.e. the mother of the child/student, however, name of the student was recorded as Ku. Sonam Sharma.

¶32

In the aforementioned facts of the case, where in one mark-sheet, name of the student is mentioned as Ku. Sonam Sharma, Father’s name – Mahesh Sharma and Mother’s name, according to Annexure P/5 is mentioned as Rani Sharma and caste as Bramhin, in the opinion of this Court, the disputed facts are involved in this case, which can be decided by the Court of Civil jurisdiction competent on the basis of evidence and therefore, I do not find any good ground to grant relief as prayed for in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed reserving liberty with the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for redressal of the grievance as raised in this writ petition.

¶33

¶34

With the aforesai d observation and directions, this writ petition stands

¶35

dismissed .

¶36

SHUBHAM Digitallysigned by Sd/-
DEY SHUBHAM
DEY (Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey

Ranno Begam v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranno Begam v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Agrawal @ Anil Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dharmednra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiv Mangal Singh Pawar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/s New Jeewan Bus Services Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bharat Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Netram Kashyap Vs State of Chhattisgarh