Allowed

Tintu Varghese v. the National Institute of Open Schooling (Nios)

Kerala HC8 Jul 2024WP(C)/18078/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking correction of the petitioner's date of birth and mother's name in NIOS records. Court directed the 2nd respondent to correct the records despite the delay exceeding ten years, citing serious hardship and future prospects.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to correct the petitioner's date of birth and mother's name in all records and related documents.

Tintu Varghese Vs the National Institute of Open… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 18078 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

TINTU VARGHESE AGED 40 YEARS D/O. M.V. VARGHESE, MANAKKALATTU HOUSE, HILL PALACE, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682301 BY ADV. T.U.SUJITH KUMAR

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

1 THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF OPEN SCHOOLING (NIOS) A-24/25, INSTITUTIONAL AREA SECTOR-62, NOIDA GAUTAM BUDHAA NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, PIN - 201309

¶10

2 THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF OPEN SCHOOLING (NIOS), REGIONAL CENTRE, 6TH FLOOR, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682036

¶11

*3 K.P. MARIYAMMA, AGED 62 YEARS, W/O. VARGHESE, KOTTAVILAYIL, UDAYANAGAR, ATHANI P.O, KILLANNUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT

¶12

PIN-680581

¶13

**(ADDL R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 08.07.20204 IN I.A. NO.1/2024)*

¶14

BY ADV. SRI. V. DEVAN FOR NIOS.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶16

08.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C)No.18078 of 2024

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Dated this the 08^th day of July, 2024

¶21

The prayer in the writ petition is to direct the 2^nd respondent to correct the petitioner’s date of birth as 04.11.1983 and her mother’s name as K.P. Mariamma in Exts.P1 Mark Statement, P1(a) Secondary School Certificate and P2, Migration cum Transfer Certificate issued by the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS).

¶22

According to the petitioner, the inadvertent mistake with respect to the date of birth and her mother’s name, if not corrected, will ruin her future prospects in life. The petitioner is facing a predicament in carrying out the correction, since Ext.P4 notification issued by the NIOS does not permit correction in the date of birth once recorded, after ten years.

¶23

WP(C)No.18078 of 2024

¶24

¶25

Heard, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the NIOS.

¶26

Indisputably, the request for correction of

¶27

the school records is made by the petitioner beyond ten years. At the same, the notification provides for carrying out correction even after ten years, if there is a specific direction in that regard by a Court of competent jurisdiction. In the case at hand, the requirement for correction arose when the petitioner decided to set up residence with her husband, who is working abroad. The difference in petitioner’s date of birth and her mother’s name in the birth certificate and school records will result in the petitioner’s prospects of joining her husband being impeded. Under similar circumstances, a Division Bench of this Court in Subin Mohammed v. Union of India [2016 (1) KLT 340] had allowed the prayer for correction. The relevant portion of that judgment reads as under;

¶28

WP(C)No.18078 of 2024

¶29

¶30

“It is contended that the future prospects of the petitioners to study or get employment abroad, will be substantially affected if the entry of date of birth in the mark sheet does not tally with that in the birth certificate. Though a writ of mandamus cannot be issued in the strict sense, we are of the view that, failure to exercise jurisdiction may put the petitioners to serious hardship. Hence, to render justice, it is always open for the Court to pass appropriate orders, taking into account the facts and circumstances of each case. However, if disputed questions of fact arises, it will not be appropriate for this Court to entertain the matter. “

¶31

Learned Standing Counsel for the NIOS

¶32

submitted that, even if this Court decides to condone the delay and direct correction of the records, that shall be done on terms, since no justifiable reason is offered for the delay.

¶33

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, directing the 2^nd respondent to carry out necessary correction with respect to the date of birth of the petitioner and her mother’s name in Exts.P1, P1(a) and P2 and related official records of the NIOS. As the request for correction is made after the stipulated period of ten years, the petitioner shall

¶34

¶35

¶36

pay cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees Thousand only) to the 2^nd respondent within three weeks. Needless to

¶37

say, the petitioner will also be liable to meet the

¶38

necessary expenses for carrying out the correction.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

NB/8-7

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18078/2024

¶46

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-P1	A TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER DATED INSTITUTE OF OPEN	THE MARK 12.12.2014 SCHOOLING.	STATEMENT OF ISSUED BY NATI	THE ONAL
EXHIBIT-P1(A)	A TRUE COPY OF THE OF THE PETITIONER NATIONAL INSTITUTE	SECONDARY DATED 15 OF OPEN S	SCHOOL CERTIFI .04.2015 ISSUED CHOOLING.	CATE BY
EXHIBIT-P2	A TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF TH ISSUED BY NATIONAL	THE MIGR E PETITION INSTITUTE	ATION CUM TRAN ER DATED 12.12. OF OPEN SCHOOLI	SFER 2014 NG
EXHIBIT-P3	A TRUE COPY OF T PETITIONER DATE NEDUMKANDAM GRAMA	HE BIRTH D 12.12. PANCHAYAT.	CERTIFICATE OF 2023 ISSUED	THE BY
EXHIBIT-P4	A TRUE COPY OF DATED 06.07.2022 RESPONDENT.	THE NOTIFI ISSUED	CATION NO. 23/ BY THE F	2022 IRST
EXHIBIT-P5	A TRUE COPY OF TH E-SERVICE PORTAL OPEN SCHOOLING.	E WEBPAGE OF THE NA	DOWNLOADED FROM TIONAL INSTITUTE	THE OF
EXHIBIT-P6	ORIGINAL AFFIDAVI THIRD RESPONDENT D	T SWORN ATED 27.06	BY THE ADDITI .2024.	ONAL
EXHIBIT-P7	A TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER.	THE AA	DHAR CARD OF	THE
EXHIBIT-P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE	PASSPORT	OF THE PETITIONE	R.
EXHIBIT-P9 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:	A TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER. NIL	THE DRIVI	NG LICENSE OF	THE

¶47

TRUE COPY

¶48

P.A. TO JUDGE

Tintu Varghese v. the National Institute of Open Schooling (Nios)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tintu Varghese v. the National Institute of Open Schooling (Nios)

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

Power Grid Corporation of India Limited Vs Annamma

Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Vs Jacob. K.P

The Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Vs K.C.Ishac

Gurudeva College of Advanced Studies, Koyilandy Vs State of Kerala

K.Sadanandan Vs District Police Chief

P.V. Shaji Vs the District Supply Officer