Allowed

Vineeth J. v. the Central Board of Secondary Education

Kerala HC9 Dec 2020WP(C)/23216/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner petitioned for name correction in CBSE records after leaving school, relying on gazette notification and statutory documents which were rejected under Bye-Law Rule 69.1. The court held that such documents are permissible and set aside the rejection order.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P7 set aside; direction to 2nd respondent to reconsider application and change name within two months.

Vineeth J. Vs the Central Board of Secondary Education — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.23216 OF 2020(B)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

VINEETH J., AGED 18 YEARS, S/O. JAYALAL, ANAMUKHATHU VEEDU, PALLAVI NAGAR -16, PUNTHALATHAZHAM P.O., KILIKOLLOOR P. O., KOLLAM - 691 004.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.C.R.JAYAKUMAR SRI.NOBEL RAJU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT SHIKSHA KENDRA, 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, NEW DELHI – 110 092.

¶11

2 THE REGIONAL OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, CBSE, BLOCK -B, 2ND FLOOR, LIC BUILDING, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURM - 695 001.

¶12

3 THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

4 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, THYCAUD P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶14

5 THE PRINCIPAL, SREE NARAYANA PUBLIC SCHOOL, VADAKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM - 691 010.

¶15

BY ADVS.SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE SMT.PRINCY XAVIER ,GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.23216 OF 2020(B)

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order by which his request for changing his name was rejected.

¶21

3. Petitioner has passed Secondary School Examination of the Board held in March, 2018, undergoing his studies in 5^th respondent School. In Ext.P1 certificate issued by the 2^nd respondent on 29.05.2018, his name is shown as Amboottilal.J. He got his name changed as Vineeth.J by publication in Ext.P4 gazette notification dated 05.11.2019. He got Ext.P5 birth certificate on 06.02.2020, in which his

¶22

name was shown as Amboottilal.J alias

¶23

Vineeth.J. Ext.P6 Aadhaar Card was also produced, which would show the name of the petitioner as Vineeth.J. On the basis of these documents, petitioner had submitted an application, requesting for carrying out corresponding correction in his school records.

¶24

WP(C).No.23216 OF 2020(B)

¶25

¶26

2^nd respondent rejected it as per Ext.P7 order on the ground that the provisions in the Rule 69.1 of the Examination Bye-Laws do not permit the same. It is also stated that the name was incorporated in the school records in accordance with the details furnished by the parents of the petitioner at the time of admission and that no steps were taken for any correction or change while petitioner was studying in the school. It is stated that on the basis of documents obtained after he left the School, petitioner is claiming the change of name.

¶27

4. The learned Standing Counsel has filed a statement reiterating the contents of Ext.P7. It is stated that on the basis of the documents obtained subsequent to the issuance of Ext.P1 certificate, petitioner is claiming change in name and the same is not permissible under clause 69.1(i) of the Examination Bye-Law. It

¶28

WP(C).No.23216 OF 2020(B)

¶29

¶30

is stated that if at all any change was required, that should have been requested before the petitioner left the school/appeared in the examination and that entries in the school records maintained by the 5^th respondent as well as the 2^nd respondent, were made on the basis of the details furnished by his parents.

¶31

5. I have considered the contentions on

¶32

both sides.

¶33

6. It is seen that petitioner has requested for correction of his name on the basis of the documents issued by statutory authorities and also on the basis of gazette notification. The said application has been submitted immediately after the petitioner left the 5^th respondent school. Even according to the respondents, a gazette notification as well as documents issued by the statutory authorities are permissible, provided there is a court order. Moreover there is no delay in submitting

¶34

WP(C).No.23216 OF 2020(B)

¶35

¶36

the application. Therefore the application of the petitioner was liable to be considered based on those documents, especially when the change of name was notified in the gazette.

¶37

Therefore Ext.P7 is set aside. There shall be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to reconsider the application of the petitioner

¶38

and to carry out the change of name of petitioner in accordance with his request within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. In case, petitioner requires correction in any other records, petitioner would be free to move the appropriate authorities.

¶39

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/-

¶40

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶41

¶42

WP(C).No.23216 OF 2020(B)

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX

¶45

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶46

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE THE CONT	COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY ROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, CENTRAL
	BOARD OF NO.431229	SECONDARY EDUCATION VIDE ROLL 1.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE VIDES REG	COPY OF THE +1 COURSE CERTIFICATE ISTRATION NO.7042030.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE VIDES REG	COPY OF THE +2 COURSE CERTIFICATE ISTRATION NO.7042030.
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE VOL.VIII/ GAZETTE D	COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE NO.50 PAGE NO.1975 OF THE KERALA ATED 17.12.2019.
EXHIBIT P5	THE TRUE ISSUED BY DEATHS, K 6.2.2020	COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE THE SUB REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND OLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION DATED VIDES NO.80070168-0232280864.
EXHIBIT P6	THE TRUE NO.712352	COPY OF THE AADHAAR CARD VIDES 974604 ISSUED BY THE UNIQUE
	IDENTITY THE PETIT	AUTHORITY OF INDIA IN FAVOUR OF IONER.
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE THE 2ND DATED 28 TVPM/M&M-	COPY OF THE REPLY-LETTER ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT .09.2020 VIDES REF. NO.CBSE/RO- 2939/2019.
EXHIBIT P8	THE TRUE HIGH COUR	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE T OF KERALA IN WP(C) 7489/2020.

Vineeth J. v. the Central Board of Secondary Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vineeth J. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghavendra Nayak B. Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

P.v.Sebastian Vs the District Collector

E.a.Murali Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Rafeeq K.K. Vs the State of Kerala

Rajesh Varkey Vs State of Kerala

Manu Bobby, Vs the District Magistrate and District Collector