IK'IMKBMBBK RlBSIBii— .->-*- V ft^tooealN6.2<Wfil^®4fl wpEi.aawffi: f^TK^ER: fei^h Slngh^ Ste Shrt Doman SiBgh, Thethwar, ^iwt aboi.fr 24 ya»s,E%> Vil&geTarra, Cfefcic(E»j%(e^; Versus RESPONDENTS: The S1at8 of ehhaUfesprh, Througb ; theSscretery. EditrattonD^iwteiient; DKS Bha^ran,. Maitfrala^i, Rgipur (CG) ' The •ChhatBs^irh Secondaiy , Education &w<S, Raipur, Through the - Secretary, Byron Bazar, Raipur(CG) Present: Shri S.G. Verma, counsel for ttie appettant. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocerte for the State. Oivision Bench: Hon'bleShri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. JUOGMENT (3-8-2010) 1. The appe!!art has preferred this writ appeai against the order dated 6t July, 2010 passed in Writ Petition (C) No.6821/2009 <whereby the appellant's writ petition for quashing the order of respondent No.2 Board, wherebythe Board refused to correct date ofbirth, has been dismissed. In the said wrft petition, the appeliant has also prayed for direction to respondent No.2 to correct his date of birth in the High School Certificate. 2. Indisputably the appellant was granted 10 class mark sheet in the year 2002 in which his date of birth has been mentioned as 24-6-1986 and the appellant left the schooi in the year 2002. He raised an objection with respect to entry regarding his date of birth in the year 2009 i.e. after the lapse of about 7 years. ^^i.aas*^ ^r' jf ^a^ lfe^y la '•*, 3. Learned counsel for the appsllant submitted that writ petition has been dismissed on the ground that Rule 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Date of Birth (Entries in the Schoo! Register) Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules') cleariy prohibits entertaining an application for correction of date of birth after the student has left the schoo!. The instant application has been preferred after 7 years. Since the appeliant- left the school; however, Rule 9 is applicable only to such student who has not pursued education up to the end of secondary standard whereas, in the instant case, the appellant pursued his studies up to High Schoo! (ciass-10^. !t was further argued that Trom perusa! of Primary Schoo! Certifrcate of the appeliant and certificate of ciass-8 , it is ciear that actua! date of birth of the appeilant is 24 Aprii, 1986 and the entry in the mark sheet of High School Certificate Examination (Class-10'^ is erroneous. In the circumstances, the writ appeal may be a!Iowed by dec'aring Rule-9 of the Rules as unconstitutional. 4. Learned Slngle Judge, after reproducing Rule 9 of the Rules, has held thus:- "7. Rule 9 ofthe Rules, 1973 deariy prohibits entertaining an application for correction of date of birth afier the student has left the school. The application was made in the year 2009, which is not permissible under the provisions of Rule 9 of the Rules, 1973 without questioning the vaiidity of She same. Thus, no order contrary to provisions of Rule 9 may be passed by this Court." 5. Looking to the specific prohibition contained in Ruls 9 ofthe Rules against entertaining any appiication for correction of entries in the High Schoot Certificate, we are of the opinion that the writ petition has rightly been dismissed. •a"J^t9\ /) Ban/e 6. In the result, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the 'earned Single Judge. The appeal being devoid of merit desen/es dismissa! and the same is accordingjy dismissed. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge