Deepanshu Verma Vs Central Board of Secondary… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

Deepanshu Verma Vs Central Board of Secondary… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to make a fresh representation for correction of Date of Birth to the Head of the School, who shall forward the request to CBSE for action in accordance with law; pending applications (CM APPLs. 70476-70477/2025) also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing Respondent-CBSE to decide the Petitioner's representation (Annexure P-9) by a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks, and/or to correct the Petitioner's Date of Birth from 11.08.1999 to 25.01.1999 in the CBSE Class X certificate. +1 more

Court's answer

The writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation for correction of Date of Birth to the Head of the School.

Ratio / Principle

As and when the Petitioner makes the request, the Head of the School shall forward it to CBSE for necessary action, in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The Court expressly reserved the merits: it did not express any opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Singh), W.P.(C) 17139/2025 & CM APPLs. 70476-70477/2025, Order dated 12.11.2025: Petitioner Deepanshu Verma, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, sought (i) a writ of mandamus directing CBSE to decide his representation dated 22.0 .2025 (Annexure P-9, date partially illegible in source) by a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks, and/or (ii) correction of his Date of Birth from 11.08.1999 to 25.01.1999 in the CBSE Class X certificate, citing the law laid down in Jigya Yadav v CBSE (supra). On notice issuance, CBSE's Additional Standing Counsel submitted that per Clause 69.2 (iii) of Examination Bye-Laws, 1995, a student's Date of Birth correction request must be forwarded by the Head of the School with attested photocopies of the prescribed documents, hence a representation made directly to CBSE cannot be entertained, relying on Jigya Yadav (Minor) (Through Guardian/Father Hari Singh) v. CBSE and Others, (2021) 7 SCC 535 (SC). Counsel for the Petitioner thereupon withdrew the petition in light of Clause 69.2 and the Supreme Court judgment. The Court disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to make a fresh representation to the Head of the School, directed that upon such request the Head of the School shall forward it to CBSE for necessary action in accordance with law, expressly recorded that no opinion was expressed on the merits, and disposed of the pending applications.

$~152

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 17139/2025 & CM APPLs. 70476-70477/2025

DEEPANSHU VERMA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. K. Vijayanthi, Mr. Ravi Rathore and Mr. Nagender, Advocates.

versus

CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION (CBSE) & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Manisha Singh, ASC for R-1/CBSE. Mr. Rishabh Sahu, SPC with Mr. Govil Upadhyaya, G.P for R-2/UoI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

O R D E R

% 12.11.2025

This writ petition is filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent-CBSE to consider and decide the Petitioner's representation dated 22.0 .2025 (Annexure P-9) by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of four weeks or such time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit; and/or

(ii) Issue a further direction to the Respondent-CBSE to pass appropriate orders correcting the Petitioner's Date of Birth from 11.08.1999 to 25.01.1999 in the CBSE Class X certificate, in light of the documents on record and the law laid down in Jigya Yadav v CBSE(supra)”

Issue notice.

Counsels, as above, accept notice on behalf of the respective Respondents.

W.P.(C) 17139/2025

Page 1 of 2

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/11/2025 at 13:03:08

At the outset, Ms. Manisha Singh, learned Additional Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 1/CBSE, appearing on advance copy of the writ petition, submits that as per Clause 69.2 (iii) of Examination Bye-Laws, 1995, request for correction in Date of Birth of a student has to be forwarded by the Head of the School along with attested photocopies of various documents mentioned therein and therefore, representation of the Petitioner made directly to CBSE cannot be entertained. In support of this plea, reliance is placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav (Minor) (Through Guardian/Father Hari Singh) v. Central Board of Secondary Education and Others, (2021) 7 SCC 535 .

In light of Clause 69.2 and the judgment of the Supreme Court, counsel for the Petitioner seeks to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to make a fresh representation for correction in Date of Birth to the Head of the School.

Writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for. Needless to state, as and when the request is made by the Petitioner, the Head of the School shall forward the request to CBSE for necessary action, in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of this case.

Pending applications also stand disposed of.

JYOTI SINGH, J

NOVEMBER 12, 2025 S.Sharma

W.P.(C) 17139/2025

Page 2 of 2

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/11/2025 at 13:03:08