Dismissed

Smt Sarita Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC23 Jun 2026WPC/2964/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ-directed change of her name in 10th and 12th marksheet/certificates issued by CGSOS, from Sahodra Chandra to Sarita Chandra post-marriage. The court found no statutory provision obligating such alteration and no clerical error; it dismissed the petition for lack of legal right warranting Article 226 interference.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition dismissed, no order as to costs.

Smt Sarita Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

2026:CGHC:25795

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

AVINASH SHARMA

¶6

Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.06.30 18:30:11 +0530

¶7

WPC No. 2964 of 2026

¶8

1 - Smt Sarita Chandra W/o- Shri Yogesh Kumar Chandra Aged About 39 Years R/o- Ward No. 02, Kataud, Village Kataud, Tehsil Dabhra, DistrictJanjgir- Champa (C.G.)

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)-492002.

¶12

2 - The Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Open School (C G S O S), Office Beside U C O Bank, Pension Bada, Raipur-492001, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

3 - The Controller Of Examinations, Chhattisgarh State Open School (C G S O S), Office Beside U C O Bank Pension Bada, Raipur-492001, DistrictRaipur (C.G.)

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Shri Ritesh Giri,Advocate.
For State/respondent	: Shri Shreyansh Mehta,PL.
For Respondent No.2 & 3	: Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

¶16

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶17

Order On Board

¶18

24/06/2026

¶19

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

¶20

a. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents to change the name of the petitioner in the High school as well Higher Secondary (10+2) marksheet/certificate from "Sahodra Chandra" to "Sarita Chandra";

¶21

¶22

b. This Hon'ble Court kindly be pleased to Direct the respondents to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner within a time bound manner; c. Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.

¶23

Necessary facts of the case are that the petitioner had appeared in and successfully passed the High school Examination conducted by the respondent Board in year 2017 bearing Roll no 15091715056 and Higher Secondary (10+2) Examination conducted by the respondent Board in the session April-May 2022 bearing Roll No. 21523220129. In the mark-sheet/certificate issued by the respondent authorities, the petitioner's name has been recorded as "Sahodra Chandra". The petitioner was married to Shri Yogesh Kumar Chandra on 05.05.2005 and after marriage her name came to be recognized and used as "Sarita Chandra" and the petitioner's present and legally recognized name is "Sarita Chandra", which is being used by the petitioner in all Government, statutory and private records. The petitioner has executed a duly sworn affidavit regarding the name change/correction, which has been notarized in accordance with law. Petitioner's Aadhar Card, PAN Card and other identity documents also record her name as "Sarita Chandra". Due to difference in the petitioner's name in educational certificates and identity documents, the petitioner is facing grave difficulties in employment opportunities, banking transactions, Government schemes and other official works. The petitioner submitted a detailed representation before the respondent authorities requesting

¶24

¶25

correction of her name in the mark-sheet/certificate along with supporting documents on 21.04.2026, which is still pending, no action has been taken by the respondents. Hence this Petition.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is facing difficulties due to the discrepancy in her name in the marksheet of 10^th and 12^th standard. He submits that petitioner’s actual name is Sarita Chandra, however, in the marksheet, petitioner’s name has been recorded as Sahodra Chandra. He submits that the petitioner has executed a duly sworn affidavit regarding her change of name which has been notarized in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has also preferred a detailed representation regarding correction of her name in the marksheet, however, till date no decision has been taken by them. As such, necessary directions may kindly be issued by this Court.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 would raise objection to the prayer made by the petitioner.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶29

In the case at hand, the petitioner is seeking correction of her in the High School Certificate Examination and Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination. She contends that her name “Sahodra Chandra” recorded in those marksheets is incorrect which ought to have been “Sarita Chandra”.

¶30

¶31

It is an admitted position that the petitioner got married to one Yogesh Kumar Chandra on 05.05.2005. The petitioner claims that her name ‘Sarita Chandra’ is her actual name and it has been wrongly recorded as “Sahodra Chandra” in the her marksheet. She further contends that she was being addressed as ‘Sahodra Chandra’ prior to marriage and Subsequent to marriage, she is being being addressed as ‘Sarita Chandra’. As such, while passing the 10^th and 12^th examination in 2017 and 2022, respectively, Sarita Chandra ought to have been mentioned in the marksheets instead of Sahodra Chandra.

¶32

From the pleadings on record, it is not the case of the petitioner that there was any clerical, typographical or inadvertent error committed by the respondent Board while preparing the mark-sheets or certificates. Rather, the petitioner seeks substitution of the name recorded in the educational certificates on the ground that subsequent to her marriage she has adopted and is presently using the name "Sarita Chandra". Such a request is essentially one for change or substitution of name and not for correction of an error in the educational record. The educational certificates are intended to reflect the particulars of the candidate as recorded in the Board's records at the time of admission and examination.

¶33

The petitioner has not pointed out any statutory provision, rule or regulation governing the respondent Board which casts a mandatory obligation upon the respondents to alter or substitute the name

¶34

¶35

recorded in the certificates in the facts of the present case. In the absence of any such enabling provision, no writ of mandamus can be issued directing the respondents to carry out the change sought by the petitioner.

¶36

It is also pertinent to note that the petitioner admittedly got married on 05.05.2005, whereas she appeared in the High School Examination in the year 2017 and the Higher Secondary Examination in the year 2022. Thus, at the time of seeking admission, filling up the examination forms and verification of particulars by the respondent Board, the petitioner had sufficient opportunity to ensure that her name was correctly recorded as "Sarita Chandra", if indeed that was the name by which she desired to be identified in her educational records. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner raised any objection or sought correction of her name at any stage prior to issuance of the certificates. Having allowed the educational records to attain finality, the petitioner cannot, after several years, seek substitution of the name recorded therein by invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court, particularly in the absence of any statutory provision enabling such alteration.

¶37

For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the considered opinion that

¶38

the petitioner has failed to establish any legal or fundamental right warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶39

¶40

The writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be and is hereby

¶41

dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶44

Avinash

Smt Sarita Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sarita Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhaneshwari Sahu Vs South East Central Railway

Satpal Singh Saluja Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kamlesh Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satish Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhedprakash Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh