Allowed

Simi V.S. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Oct 2021WP(C)/20151/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the rejection of her application to correct her date of birth in her SSLC book using her birth certificate. The Court noted that underage admission for first standard is not a valid ground for refusal and ordered the impugned order quashed to reconsider the request.

What did the court decide?

The order of the third respondent rejecting the application for date of birth correction in the SSLC is quashed; the third respondent is directed to reconsider the application.

Simi V.S. Vs State of Kerala — 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

¶5

WP(C) NO. 20151 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SIMI V.S. AGED 42 YEARS W/O.SUGEESH K.K., KALATHUNGAL VEEDU, NANTHIATTUKUNNAM, NORTH PARAVUR, PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM-683513.

¶8

BY ADVS. LEEJOY MATHEW.V. SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695001.

¶11

2 COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER (EXAMINATIONS), POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695012.

¶12

3 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER (EXAMINATIONS), POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695012.

¶13

4 THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH & DEATHS, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH & DEATHS, NORTH PARAVUR MUNICIPALITY, ERNAKULAM-683513.

¶14

BY SRI.BIMAL K. NATH, SR. GOVT. PLEADER

¶15

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

¶16

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶17

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W. P. (C) No.20151 of 2021 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6^th day of October, 2021

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

The request of the petitioner for correction of her

¶20

date of birth in the Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC), was turned down by the third respondent as per Ext.P3 order. Challenging the same this writ petition is filed.

¶21

Ext.P1 is the copy of the certificate of birth

¶22

of the petitioner issued by the Registrar of Births and

¶23

Deaths, Parur Municipality. As per Ext.P1, the

¶24

petitioner's date of birth is 14.12.1979 . However, in

¶25

Ext.P2 SSLC book the date of birth is shown as 21.05.1979 . It is seeking correction of the date of birth in Ext.P2 SSLC book in tune with Ext.P1

¶26

certificate of birth that the petitioner has submitted the application before the third respondent.

¶27

W. P. (C) No.20151 of 2021

¶28

-: 2 :-

¶29

The application was rejected by the third

¶30

respondent as per Ext.P3 for the reason that, if the

¶31

request is granted, as per the records the petitioner would be below five years of age and thus under aged for admission in the first standard.

¶32

The reason that, if the correction is allowed

¶33

the applicant would have been under aged to secure admission to the first standard at the relevant time, is not a ground to refuse the correction, has been held by this Court in K. K. Nandakumaran v. Joint Commissioner for Government Examinations, Trivandrum [1976 KLN C. No.158] and Chandrika A. K. v. State of Kerala and Others [2010 (1) KLT 223] . It was held that, if it is found that the date of birth given in the SSLC book is erroneous, the correction is to be effected. In the light of the law as laid down by this Court, petitioner's application is liable to be reconsidered.

¶34

Ext.P1 is the copy of the certificate of birth

¶35

of the petitioner issued by the Registrar of Births and

¶36

W. P. (C) No.20151 of 2021

¶37

-: 3 :-

¶38

Deaths. The evidentiary value of public documents and

¶39

its significance while considering an application for correction of date of birth in school records have been considered recently by the Apex Court in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE [2021 (3) KLT 711 (SC)] . Therein the Apex Court observed that legal presumption in relation to public documents as envisaged in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 cannot be ignored.

¶40

Accordingly Ext.P3 order of the third respondent is quashed. The third respondent shall consider the petitioner's application seeking correction of date of birth afresh.

¶41

Writ petition is allowed as above.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE (SSLC) SHOWING THE DATE OF BIRTH. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER K.DIS/EX/BB4/5313 / 2009/CGE. DATED 22.4.2009.

Simi V.S. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Simi V.S. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

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

Parvathy S. J. Vs the Assistant Secretary

Ravi Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority