Allowed

Murali P.N. v. Central Board of Secondry Education

Kerala HC5 Mar 2020WP(C)/63/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition seeking correction of the petitioner's mother's name in his CBSE Class X certificate, directing the school to update records and the CBSE to reconsider the application.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent to correct school records and forward them to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration of the name correction application within six weeks.

Murali P.N. Vs Central Board of Secondry Education — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.63 OF 2020(G)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MURALI P.N. AGED 50 YEARS S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR.P., VIMELY HOUSE, P.O.PADDY, KODALY, THRISSUR, PIN-680 699.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO SMT.LAYA SIMON

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREETHI VIHAR, NEW DELHI, PIN-111 092, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2 REGIONAL OFFICER,

¶12

CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICER, LIC DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CAMPUS

¶13

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN-695 004.

¶14

3 SREE NARAYANA VIDYA MANDIR CENTRAL SCHOOL, KODALY P.O., PADDY, PIN-680 699, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.

¶15

R1-2 BY SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C).No.63 OF 2020(G)

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

¶21

“i) To call for the records relating to Exhibits P10 & P12 & quash the same so far as it rejects the request for correction in mothers name by issuing a Writ of Certiorari.

¶22

ii) To direct the 2^nd respondent to reconsider the Exhibit P9 application on the basis of Exhibits P2 to P7 and allow the correction of the name of the mother in Exhibit P1 so as to be in tune with Exhibit P2 birth certificate.”

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶24

the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶25

It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted an application for correction of the name of the petitioner and his wife in the CBSE Class X Certificate of the petitioner's son. On the request of the petitioner, the 3^rd respondent School Principal had forwarded the same before the 2^nd respondent, by Ext.P9, seeking correction of the name of the petitioner and his wife. The 2^nd respondent vide Email dated 11.07.2019 to the 3^rd respondent, refused to

¶26

WP(C).No.63 OF 2020(G)

¶27

¶28

make change in name of the petitioner's wife in the certificate. The application has been rejected by the CBSE on the ground that the school records were not found in consonance with desired correction in the parents' name. It is stated that the petitioner has produced Exts.P2 to P7 to justify the correction sought for.

¶29

A statement has been placed on record by the respondents 1 & 2 contending that the changes in the certificates are to be considered under amended bye-law 69.1(i), which was brought into effect by notification dated 01.02.2018. It is stated that the said corrections can be effected only if they are admitted by the court of law and notified in the Government gazette. It is stated that the correction sought for by the petitioner is not in the category of typographical error and therefore, the correction cannot be allowed.

¶30

Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that the rejection of the application was not proper. A Division Bench of this Court in Subin Mohammed Vs. Union of India [2016 (1) KLT 340] has held that

¶31

¶32

WP(C).No.63 OF 2020(G)

¶33

correction is possible in the CBSE Certificates even when the application is belated as per the bye laws on payment of fine or costs.

¶34

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to carry out necessary corrections in the school records, with respect to the name of the petitioner's wife, taking into account Exts.P2 to P7 and forward the corrected copy of the school register duly certified to the 2^nd respondent within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of the same, the 2^nd respondent shall reconsider the application submitted by the petitioner within a further period of six weeks. In order to enable the respondents to proceed in accordance with law, Exts.P10 and P12 will stand quashed.

¶35

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

Bng/09.03.2020

WP(C).No.63 OF 2020(G)

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE MARK STATEMENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S SON BY CBSE FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL EXAMINATIONS.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO PETITIONERS SON IS DATED 19.01.2019.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF SUPERINTENDENT DATED 04.01.2019.
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ONE AND THE SAME CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS WIFE.
EXHIBIT P5	THE 1ST PAGE OF THE SSLC BOOK OF PETITIONERS WIFE KALADEVI.
EXHIBIT P6	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PAN CARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S WIFE.
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD ISSUED TO PETITIONER'S WIFE.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.01.2019.
EXHIBIT P9	THE TRUE COPY OF THE CORRECTION APPLICATION DATED 30.01.2019.
EXHIBIT P9 A	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 30.01.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PRINCIPAL.
EXHIBIT P10	THE TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 12.02.2019 FROM 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11	THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20.06.2019.
EXHIBIT P12	THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT P11 THE SECOND RESPONDENT HAS SENT ANOTHER EMAIL DATED 11.07.2019.

¶45

WP(C).No.63 OF 2020(G)

¶46

¶47

EXHIBIT P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.10.2019.

Murali P.N. v. Central Board of Secondry Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murali P.N. v. Central Board of Secondry 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

Goutham P.S Vs the Central Board Secondary Education

Pooja Nair Vs Union of India

Muraleedharan Vs State of Kerala

The Chairman, Vs Union of India

T.Prakashan Vs the Superintending Engineer

Basheer Vs Union of India