Allowed

Alfas.P (Minor) v. the Principal

Kerala HC3 Aug 2021WP(C)/6228/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment addresses a minor petitioner's writ petition seeking correction of his and his parents' names in school records which were mistakenly entered due to errors in an earlier birth certificate. The High Court directed the school and the Central Board of Secondary Education to carry out the corrections within thirty days, relying on the Apex Court's directions.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to carry out the corrections in school records and Board records within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Alfas.P (Minor) Vs the Principal — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 6228 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ALFAS.P (MINOR)

¶8

REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER, ASHRAF P. , AGED 51 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED, PUNNAKKODEN HOUSE, KAPPENKOLLY, MEPPADI P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577.

¶9

BY ADVS. M.B.SHYNI SRI.DEEPAK RAJ SMT.C.P.ROOPA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE PRINCIPAL MOUNT TABOR ENGLISH SCHOOL, MEPPADI P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673577.

¶12

2 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHIKSHA KENDRA, 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110092.

¶13

3 THE REGIONAL OFFICER CBSE, REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, B, LIC DIVISIONAL OFFICE CAMPUS, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695004.

¶14

BY ADV SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 2021

¶17

¶18

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 2021

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

Petitioner is studying in tenth standard at Mount Tabor English School, Meppadi, Wayanad, a school affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (the Board). It is stated by the petitioner that in the school records, the name of the petitioner and his parents are shown mistakenly as Alfas, Ashraf and Thasnim respectively, instead of Alfas P., Ashraf P. and Thasneem M. The case of the petitioner is that the mistaken entries happened to be made in the school records on account of the mistakes in the Birth Certificate of the petitioner. It is stated that Exts.P4 is the representation preferred by petitioner before the first respondent and Ext.P5 is the representation preferred before the third respondent for correction of the mistaken entries in the school records after

¶21

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 2021

¶22

¶23

getting the mistakes in the birth certificate corrected. Ext.P2 is the corrected birth certificate of the petitioner. It is alleged by the petitioner that the applications aforesaid are not being considered by the respondents, taking the stand that a court order is required for carrying out the corrections sought by the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said stand of the respondents and hence this writ petition for appropriate directions.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the Board.

¶25

It has been held by the Apex Court in Jigya Yadav v. C.B.S.E. and others (Civil Appeal No.3905 of 2011 and connected cases), that the Board is bound to afford to the students opportunity to modify the information contained in the marks statements and other documents subject to complying with the requisite formalities which are reasonable in nature. It was also held by the Apex Court in the said case that when a

¶26

¶27

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 2021

¶28

request for change of information contained in the marks statement or other documents is made on the basis of the public documents which are presumed to be genuine in terms of the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, the Board is bound to consider the request. Reverting to the facts, the request of the petitioner for correction of the entries relating to his name and the names of his parents in the school records has been made on the basis of Ext.P2 corrected birth certificate. In Ext.P2 corrected birth certificate, the name of the petitioner and his parents are shown correctly as Alfas P., Ashraf P. and Thasneem M. respectively. Ext.P2 being a public document which is presumed to be genuine in terms of the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, according to me, in the light of the directions issued by the Apex Court in Jigya Yadav , the respondents ought to have allowed the corrections sought for by the petitioner subject to appropriate conditions.

¶29

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 2021

¶30

¶31

In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to carry out the corrections sought for by the petitioner in the school records and the records of the Board as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is, however, made clear that the Board would be free to impose appropriate conditions to be complied with by the petitioner for carrying out the corrections, as indicated by the Apex Court in the judgment in Jigya Yadav .

¶32

Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE

¶33

ds 03.08.2021

¶34

W.P.(C) No.6228 of 2021

¶35

¶36

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6228/2021

¶37

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶38

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S SON DATED 29.12.2004.

¶39

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE DATED 12.03.2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S SON.

¶40

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.02.2021 IN WPC NO. 4124/2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶41

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION APPLICATION DATED 23.02.2021 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶42

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.02.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Alfas.P (Minor) v. the Principal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alfas.P (Minor) v. the Principal

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

Aysha Fida Vs Anurag Tripathi Irps

Shini Vs Insurance Ombudsman

Mir Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Federal Bank Limited

P.C.Shaji Vs Kerala Water Authority

Eliyamma Vs a.P.Kiran

R.Rajesh Vs S.Venkatesapathy IAS