IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29071 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANOOP S., S/O. N.SURESH CHAMAVILA VEEDU, THEKKUMBHAGOM KADAKKAVUR PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION REGIONAL OFFICE, (OLD NO.1630-A) J BLOCK ANNANAGAR WEST CHENNAI 600040 REPP BH ASSISTANT SECRETARY. 2. GOKULAM PUBLIC SCHOOL THUKONAM PO, KIZHUVILAM MAMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. PIN 685 104, REP BY PRINCIPAL. STANDING COUNSEL SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 29071/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MARKLIST ISSUED ON 26.5.2005 BEARING ROLL NO.4149666. EXT.P2 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF PASS ORDER 26.5.2009. EXT.P3 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATH,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION DT.9.6.2011. EXT.P4 THE PETITIONER HAD SUBMITTED APPLICATION FOR CORRECTION BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT SCHOOL ON 10.3.2011. EXT.P5 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER NO.CORRN/ REJECTION /DOB/2010 DT.01.6.2011. EXT.P6 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.234/2011 (D) RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. dnc ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 29071 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a student of the 2nd respondent school which is affiliated to the first respondent. According to him though his date of birth is 27.8.1991 it has been wrongly recorded in the school records and the certificates issued by the first respondent as 10.5.1993. He made an application for its correction. It was forwarded by the Principal of the school to the first respondent. That application was rejected by Ext.P5 order stating that it is belated. It is this order which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. In several cases of this nature this court has taken a view that even in spite of the alleged delay, the application made by a student is liable to be entertained and considered on merits. In that view of the matter Ext.P5 order cannot be sustained. Therefore I quash W.P.(C) No. 29071 OF 2011 :2 : Ext.P5 and the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions; 1. That on production of a copy of this judgment the 2nd respondent will consider the application made by the petitioner and if the school records are corrected the application along with the records will be forwarded to the first respondent. 2. On its receipt, the first respondent will conduct necessary enquiry and pass orders for correction of the certificates issued. 3. If necessary, it will be open to the 2nd respondent to require the petitioner to make a fresh application in this behalf. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-