Allowed

Parvathy S. J. v. the Assistant Secretary

Kerala HC6 Oct 2021WP(C)/18320/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the petitioner’s petition for correction of date of birth in school and CBSE records. Relying on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE, the court directed the Board to consider the request subject to compliance with prescribed conditions like affidavits and fees, noting that the reason for delay (spouse visa) was acceptable.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner’s request for changing the date of birth in records is to be considered by the sixth respondent upon compliance with requirements stipulated in the judgment of Jigya Yadav v. CBSE.

Parvathy S. J. Vs the Assistant Secretary — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 14TH ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 18320 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

PARVATHY S. J. AGED 29 YEARS D/O. JAYASREE D., NANDANAM, BHARANIKAVU, PUNALUR P. O., KOLLAM - 691 305, FROM NANDANAM, NELLIPPALLY P. O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM - 691 008.

¶7

BY ADV B.MOHANLAL

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NEW NO.3, J-BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI - 40. 2 THE JOINT SECRETARY AND REGIONAL OFFICER CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, 2ND FLOOR, BLOCK -G, LIC DIVISIONAL OFFICE CAMPUS, PATTOM P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.

¶10

3 THE CAIRMAN CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, SHIKSHA KENDRA, 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREETH VIHAR, DELHI - 110 092. 4 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, NEW NO.3, J-BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI - 40. 5 THE PRINCIPAL SABARIGIRI SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL, THOLICODE P. O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM - 691 333.

¶11

ADDL. R6 REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NEW NO.3, J-BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI - 40.

¶12

***** [ADDL. RESPONDENT NO.6 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED IN THIS WRIT PETITION AS PER ORDERS OF THIS COURT DATED 06.10.2021]

¶13

BY ADV SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶16

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W. P. (C) No.18320 of 2021 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6^th day of October, 2021

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

Contending that the request of the petitioner for

¶19

correction of date of birth in the school records and the records of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) was not entertained by the Board, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶20

According to the petitioner, her date of birth is 05.10.1992 , but has been erroneously recorded in the school records as 04.04.1994 . The petitioner relies on Ext.P5 birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Kollam Corporation, to substantiate the same.

¶21

The petitioner completed her 10^th standard in the year 2009. She seeks for correction of the school records at this distance of time. According to the petitioner, the mistake was noticed only now, when after

¶22

W. P. (C) No.18320 of 2021

¶23

-: 2 :-

¶24

her marriage, steps were taken to secure a spouse visa to join her husband.

¶25

The right of a student of the Board to seek for correction/change of the particulars in the school records and the certificates issued by the Board has been dealt with exhaustively by the Apex Court in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE [2021 (3) KLT 711 (SC)] . The situations were divided into two categories namely, where “correction” is sought and, where “change” is sought. Under the category of “corrections” the Apex Court included cases where the certificates issued by the Board were required to be made consistent with the particulars mentioned in the school records. In the category of “change” of particulars, two situations were contemplated-firstly, where by the records of the Board provide particulars different from that provided in public documents like birth certificate, aadhar card, election card etc. and secondly, a case of request for change of name consequent to the acquisition of a name by choice at a

¶26

W. P. (C) No.18320 of 2021

¶27

-: 3 :-

¶28

later point of time.

¶29

In the case at hand, the issue involved relates

¶30

to “change” of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE to make it consistent with public document and hence would fall within the first classification, of the second category. With regard to the said cases, the Apex Court observed that the legal presumption in relation to public documents as envisaged in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 cannot be ignored by the Board. It was accordingly held that, request for effecting such changes in the certificates issued by the Board, to make it in conformity with the public documents, could be entertained. It was further observed by the Apex Court

¶31

that the Board is entitled to impose reasonable conditions while considering such request. The conditions observed by the Apex Court are:-

¶32

(a) An affidavit containing a declaration and an undertaking to indemnify the Board.

¶33

(b) Payment of fee for administrative expenses.

¶34

W. P. (C) No.18320 of 2021

¶35

-: 4 :-

¶36

¶37

facts, require effecting of public notice and publication in the official gazette.

¶38

(d) Require surrender of the original certificate.

¶39

(e) A fresh certificate issued may contain

¶40

disclaimer and caption/annotation against the original

¶41

entry. (Except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of 'right to be forgotten'.)

¶42

While it is true that there has been delay on

¶43

the part of the petitioner in seeking for the “change”, the explanation offered by the petitioner that the mistake was noticed only recently when steps were taken for securing a spouse visa after her marriage, cannot be

¶44

brushed aside, especially considering her age. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner's request is

¶45

liable to be considered.

¶46

Accordingly it is ordered that, on the

¶47

petitioner submitting an application for change of date of birth through the second respondent school on

¶48

W. P. (C) No.18320 of 2021

¶49

-: 5 :-

¶50

complying with the requirements as above, then the sixth respondent shall consider the same in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court referred to supra.

¶51

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶52

Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

W. P. (C) No.18320 of 2021

¶57

-: 6 :-

¶58

The word “second” mentioned in the 3^rd line of the 7^th paragraph of the judgment dated 06.10.2021 in WP(C) 18320/2021 is corrected as “fifth” as per order dated 12.10.2021 in IA 2/2021 in WP(C) 18320/2021(L).

¶59

SD/-

¶60

JOINT REGISTRAR

¶61

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18320/2021

¶62

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶63

Exhibit P1	THE TRUE COPY OF BIRTH CERTIFICATE DATED 04.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS
	AND DEATHS, KOLLAM CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE MARKS STATEMENT OF SECONDARY SCHOOL EXAMINATION 2009 DATED
	26.05.2009 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CBSE/COORD/AS/
	C/2017 DATED 01.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
	03.12.2020 IN W.A.NO.1533/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P5	THE TRUE COPY OF CORRECTED BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATH, KOLLAM CORPORATION DATED 7.9.2021

Parvathy S. J. v. the Assistant Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvathy S. J. v. the Assistant Secretary

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

Jeemol Vs Dr.Aneena

Ernakulam District Co-Operative Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd. No. E.933 Vs the Joint Registrar(General)

Noufal K.P., Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram

Chittariparamba Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Ravi Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Simi V.S. Vs State of Kerala