Allowed

Fazil A.M. v. the Central Board of Secondary Education

Kerala HC1 Aug 2018WP(C)/25882/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court set aside an order rejecting a petitioner's request to correct his date of birth in CBSE records due to a time limit. Relying on precedents, the court directed the petitioner to submit a verified birth certificate to the school, which must correct its records, and the school must forward them to the CBSE for final correction upon payment of court costs.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside; the petitioner is directed to present the birth certificate to the school for record correction, which must then be forwarded to CBSE for final amendment upon payment

Fazil A.M. Vs the Central Board of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1940

¶4

WP(C).No. 25882 of 2018

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

FAZIL A.M. AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.ABDULLA A.M., KOODARAM KODIYATHUR PO, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 602.

¶7

BY ADVS.SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SRI.M.A.AHAMMAD SAHEER

¶8

RESPONDENTS

¶9

1. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SIKSHA KENDRA, 2 COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREETH VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110 092.

¶10

2. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, 3-J, 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR WEST, CHENNAI-600 040.

¶11

3. THE PRINCIPAL WADI RAHMA ENGLISH SCHOOL, KODIYATHUR PO, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 602.

¶12

R1-R2 BY SRI.NIRMAL S., SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

mks

¶15

WP(C).No. 25882 of 2018 (I)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)'	EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 :	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 28-5-2010 OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL EXAMINATION, 2010 ISSUED BY THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 :	TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE DATED 25-7-2011 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, KODIYATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH.
EXHIBIT P3 :	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 2-7-2018 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE MATTER OF CORRECTION OF DATE OF BIRTH FOR THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 :	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED 19-7-2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶18

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

mks 04/08/2018

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶24

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶25

Dated this the 01^st day of August, 2018

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Ext.P4 order dated 19.7.2018 issued by the 2^nd respondent-Regional Office of the CBSE whereby the request of the petitioner for correction of his date of birth in the CBSE records as per Ext.P1 has been rejected on the ground that the application in that regard has been preferred by the petitioner beyond the stipulated time limit. The prayers in this writ petition (civil) are as follows:-

¶28

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding respondents 1 and 2 to correct the date of birth of the petitioner from 13.04.1995 to 13.08.1994 in the school records and Ext. P1 certificate as sought for in Ext.P3.

¶29

ii. Issue appropriate order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper from time to time for this petitioner to attain the ends of justice.”

¶30

Heard Sri.Sunil Nair Palakkat, learned counsel

¶31

appearing for the petitioner and Sri.S.Nirmal, learned Standing Counsel for CBSE appearing for officials respondents 1 and 2. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this petition notice to respondent No.3 will stand dispensed with.

¶32

..2..

¶33

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶34

The case of the petitioner is that his date of birth has been correctly entered in Ext.P2 statutory birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Birth and Death under the provisions of the Registration of Birth and Death Act and the Rules framed thereunder, as 13.8.1994. But his date of birth was erroneously entered as 13.4.1995 in the school records maintained by the 3^rd respondent-School wherein the petitioner had studied and consequently his date of birth has been thus entered as 13.4.1995 in Ext.P1 pass certificate issued by the respondent-CBSE and other connected records maintained by that Authority. The fact that the petitioner's date of birth as entered in Ext.P1 CBSE pass certificate was in variance with that entered in Ext.P2 birth certificate came to the notice of the petitioner only recently when he had applied for selection to the Post Graduation course under the online system. Thereupon the petitioner had preferred representation/ petition before the 3^rd respondent School for getting his date of birth corrected in the school records on the basis of the birth certificate and then it is forwarded by the school authority to the 2^nd respondent-CBSE Regional Office so as to get date of birth

¶35

..3..

¶36

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶37

corrected in Ext.P1 pass certificate and other CBSE records like mark list, etc. The petitioner's request in that regard was duly forwarded by the 3^rd respondent-School to the 2^nd respondentRegional Director of CBSE as per Ext.P3 communication dated 02.07.2018. But the said request has been now rejected by the 2^nd respondent-Regional Officer of the CBSE as per the impugned Ext.P4 rejection order dated 19.7.2018 on the ground that the petitioner's request cannot be entertained as the stipulated time limit for preferring such correction is now over. It appears that at the time of the issuance of Ext.P1 CBSE pass certificate, the time limit stipulated for correction of details like date of birth in the CBSE records was within one year from the date of issuance of such certificate and the time limit in that regard has expired. However it is to be noted that the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment in Subin Mohammed v. Union of India [2016 (1) KLT 340 (DB)] , has held in para.39 thereof that while considering a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for correction of date of birth in the CBSE records, it is always open to the Court to pass appropriate orders taking into

¶38

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶39

..4..

¶40

account the facts and circumstances of each case and taking into consideration the aspect that future prospects of the candidates to study or to get employment abroad will be prejudicially affected if the entry of date of birth in the mark sheet does not tally with that entered in the birth certificate. Accordingly the Division Bench in

¶41

Subin Mohammed 's case (supra) has issued the following directions in paras.39 and 41 thereof which reads as follows:-

¶42

“39. It is contended that the future prospects of the petitioners to study or get employment abroad, will be substantially affected if the entry of date of birth in the mark sheet does not tally with that in the birth certificate. Though a writ of mandamus cannot be issued in the strict sense, we are of the view that, failure to exercise jurisdiction may put the petitioners to serious hardship. Hence, to render justice, it is always open for the Court to pass appropriate orders, taking into account the facts and circumstances of each case. However, if disputed questions of fact arises, it will not be appropriate for this Court to entertain the matter.

¶43

41. Hence, to meet the ends of justice, it will be appropriate for this Court to dispose the Writ Petitions with the following directions:

¶44

i) That C.B.S.E. shall correct the entries in the mark sheet of the petitioners with reference to their corresponding birth certificates issued by the statutory authority, if the request is found to be genuine.

¶45

(ii) Genuineness of the birth certificate can be ascertained from the respective local/statutory authority/Head of the Institution or such other method, C.B.S.E. may deem it fit.

¶46

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶47

..5..

¶48

(iii) C.B.S.E. can demand in advance a consolidated fee, including all expenses for processing such applications.

¶49

(iv) Each of the petitioners shall pay Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five thousand only) as cost to C.B.S.E. within a period of one month.

¶50

This Court in a series of other judgments like the one in

¶51

the judgment dated 29.8.2017 in W.P.(C)No.20661 of 2017 has

¶52

also issued the following directions in para.4 thereof which reads

¶53

as follows:-

¶54

“4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as also the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:

¶55

(i) The concerned authority of the school in which the petitioner has studied shall correct the name of the petitioner entered in the school records based on her birth certificate and forward the copies of the corrected school records to the CBSE, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶56

(ii) The CBSE shall carry out the correction sought by the petitioner based on the birth certificate and the corrected school records, on payment of Rs.5000/-, within two months thereafter.”

¶57

In the instant case it is to be noted that the plea of the

¶58

petitioner is that his date of birth is 13.8.1994 and the same has

¶59

been entered in Ext.P2 birth certificate issued by the statutory

¶60

..6..

¶61

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶62

Registrar of Birth and Death under the provisions of the Registration of Birth and Death Act and the Rules framed thereunder. A perusal of Ext.P2 birth certificate would show that the birth of the petitioner was duly registered on 19.8.1994 with the said statutory Registrar as per the provisions of the above said Act and the Rules; whereas the date of birth as shown in Ext.P1 CBSE pass certificate is 13.4.1995. If as a matter of fact the petitioner's correct date of birth was 13.4.1995, then there is no question of registering the birth of the petitioner on 19.8.1994. Therefore that aspect itself would clearly point out to the fact that the entry of date of birth in Ext.P1 CBSE pass certificate as 13.4.1995 is erroneous. Moreover there is a legal presumption that the records maintained by a statutory functionary like the Registrar, in the issuance of birth certificate under the provisions of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, are correct and proper.

¶63

Taking into consideration the directions issued by the Division Bench in Subin Mohammed v. Union of India [2016 (1) KLT 340 (DB)] as well as the directions issued by this Court in a series of other judgments as in the judgment dated 29.8.2017

¶64

..7..

¶65

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶66

in W.P.(C)No.20661 of 2017, it is ordered that the matter requires consideration afresh at the hands of the 2^nd respondent-Regional Office of the CBSE. For effectuating such a remit the impugned order at Ext.P4 will stand set aside.

¶67

The petitioner will produce an attested copy of Ext.P2 birth certificate before the 3^rd respondent-Principal seeking correction of the date of birth shown in those school records on the basis of the entry of the date of birth as certified in Ext.P2 statutory birth certificate. The original of the birth certificate may also be given to the 3^rd respondent-Principal for perusal and verification. Thereafter the 3^rd respondent-Principal will ensure that the school records are corrected so as to show the date of birth of the petitioner as 13.8.1994 on the basis of Ext.P2 birth certificate. The attested copies of the corrected school records in that regard should be forwarded by the 3^rd respondent-Principal along with the application of the petitioner to the 2^nd respondent-Regional Director, CBSE, Chennai and upon receipt of the papers in that regard the 2^nd respondent will effect correction of the date of birth of the petitioner as 13.8.1994 on the basis of the entry in Ext.P2

¶68

..8..

¶69

W.P.(C)No.25882 of 2018

¶70

date of birth, in Ext.P1 CBSE pass certificate and other connected records of the CBSE, like mark list, etc. in respect of the petitioner.

¶71

However it is ordered that the above said directions are

¶72

issued subject to the petitioner paying a cost of Rs.5,000/(Rupees five thousand only) by way of Demand Draft to the 2^nd respondent-Regional Director, CBSE, Chennai.

¶73

Necessary steps should be taken by the 3^rd and 2^nd respondents as afore-stated within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶74

With these observations and directions this writ petition

¶75

(civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶76

Sd/-

¶77

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶78

skj

Fazil A.M. v. the Central Board of Secondary Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fazil A.M. v. the Central Board of Secondary Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Preethi M.K Vs the Presiding Officer

Kannoth Krishnan Vs the Union of India

Kelothu Valappil Kunhathi Vs Union of India

C.Rajan Vs the Tahsildar

P.K.Fathimakutty Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs the Land Tribunal, Tirur