IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 14TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3531 of 2011(N) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- GOPIKA P.KUMAR, D/O.PUSHPAKUMAR, AGED 18 YEARS, GOKULAM, MUKUNDAPURAM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) SRI.P.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREETHY VIHAR, DELHI-110 092. 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.III J.BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR, CHENNAI-40, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SECRETARY. 3. THE PRINCIPAL MAHATMA CENTRAL SCHOOL, MAHATMA NAGAR, ERAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011. R1 TO R3 BY ADV.SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC FOR CBSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No. 3531 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 3rd February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 2. Petitioner submits that she was a student of the school of which the 3rd respondent is the Principal. According to the petitioner, her date of birth is 3.3.1992. It is stated that in the school records and in the certificates issued by respondents 1 and 2, her date of birth has been wrongly entered as 3.3.1993. 3. According to the petitioner, producing Ext.P1, the certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths of Karunagappally Panchayat, she made an application to the 3rd respondent requesting for correcting the mistake in her date of birth. Her grievance is that 3rd respondent declined to accept the application on the ground that the application is belated and hence will not be entertainable by respondents 1 and 2. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed relying on Ext.P6 judgment of this Court and seeking appropriate action. W.P (C) No. 3531 of 2011 2 4. If as stated by the petitioner, she had made an application to the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent ought to have accepted the same. Even the time frame fixed by the CBSE in its Examination Bye-laws will not justify the denial of the 3rd respondent to accept the application. This is for the reason that in Ext.P6 judgment and in the judgment in W.A No.1948/2008 and several other judgments this Court has already taken the view that irrespective of the time frame fixed, even belated applications are liable to considered on merits. 5. In that view of the above, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions. It will be open to the petitioner to submit to the 3rd respondent her application seeking correction of her date of birth in the school records and in the certificates issued by respondents 1 and 2. It is directed that if such an application is made, the 3rd respondent will accept and consider the application and if the request is found to be genuine, corrections will be made in the school records and thereafter, with his recommendation, application will W.P (C) No. 3531 of 2011 3 be forwarded to the 2nd respondent who on receipt there of will consider the matter and pass orders thereon, without any delay in the matter. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma