THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.16371 of 2010 Date: 24.11.2011 Between: Shaik Ziauddin … Petitioner and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Education Dept.), A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.16371 of 2010 ORDER : Heard Sri T.R.V.S.S.S.V. Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Education appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.5, and with their consent, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. This writ petition is filed complaining the inaction of the respondents in considering the petitioner’s claim for correction of his date of birth from 10.3.1991 to 29.9.1990 and rejecting the same by proceedings dated 5.2.2009 and 17.2.2009 of respondent Nos.2 and 3, respectively, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to change his date of birth as per the Municipal records. 3. The petitioner was born on 29.9.1990 and his date of birth was duly registered in the records of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. He states that he studied from 1st to 10th Classes in Pragathi Vidyalayam, Devarakonda. Since the said institution was an unrecognized institution, the petitioner is said to have taken admission in 10th Class in Chaitanya Vidyalayam, Devarakonda. It is stated that while admitting the petitioner in the said institution, his date of birth was wrongly entered as 10.3.1991, instead of 29.9.1990. Therefore, his father made a representation dated 8.3.2010 to the 2nd respondent-Commissioner and Director of School Education, Hyderabad, seeking correction of his date of birth. As no orders are passed by the 2nd respondent on the said representation, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the aforesaid relief. 4. The only grievance of the petitioner presented at the hearing is that even though considerable time has elapsed eversince the date of representation on 8.3.2010 for correction of his date of birth, the 2nd respondent has not taken any action thereby causing grave hardship and inconvenience to the petitioner. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that the 2nd respondent be directed to consider the said representation and take an appropriate decision within a time frame. 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has no objection for such a direction. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the short relief sought for at the hearing, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-Commissioner and Director of School Education, Hyderabad, to consider and dispose of the representation dated 8.3.2010 filed by the petitioner’s father seeking correction of date of birth of the petitioner by passing appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 24.11.2011. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.16371 of 2010 24.11.2011 (Msr)