IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1856 of 2011(F) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- KARTHIKA.K.J., D/O.JINAN.K.R., AGED 18, STD.XII, B.J.N.V., KOTTAYAM, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.V/1093, MANJANKAL, TEMPLE ROAD, THODUPUZHA-685 584. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SRI.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN M.V.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, J BLOCK, 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNANAGAR WEST, CHENNAI-600 040. 2. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, 1630A, J BLOCK, ANNANAGAR WEST, CHENNAI-600 040. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, JAWAHAR NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA, VADAVATHOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 010. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN R3 BY BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.1856 OF 2011(F) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a student of the School of which the 3rd respondent is the Principal. Ext.P2 shows that the petitioner completed her studies and the first respondent issued certificates on 26.5.2009. According to the petitioner, in the school records of respondents 1 and 2, her date of birth has been entered as 12.3.1994 instead of 12.11.1992. It is stated that seeking correction of the said mistake petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application to the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent forwarded the application to the 2nd respondent under the cover of Ext.P4. That application of the petitioner has now been rejected by Ext.P5 communication issued by the 2nd respondent. A reading of Ext.P2 shows that according to the 2nd respondent, the 3rd respondent forwarded the application without complying with the provisions of the CBSE examination bye laws. 2. Heard the standing counsel or respondents 1 and 2 and the 3rd respondent. WPC.No.1836 /2011 :2 : 3. Going by the date shown in Ext.P2 certificate issued by the 2nd respondent the application made by the petitioner cannot be said to be belated. However, standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 pointed out that on receipt of the application, the 3rd respondent is expected to consider the application and make corrections in the school records and then forward the application with his recommendations to the 2nd respondent. It is submitted that as against these rules on receipt of the application 3rd respondent simply forwarded the application of the petitioner and it was therefore the application had to be rejected. 4. In view of the submission so made by the Standing Counsel all that is required is that the 3rd respondent should reconsider the application made by the petitioner and if he is satisfied about the genuineness of the request and make corrections in the school records, then the application of the petitioner shall be forwarded to the 2nd respondent with his recommendations for appropriate action. It is ordered that action shall be taken as ordered above. On receipt of the application as above,the 2nd respondent shall, if necessary, conduct an enquiry WPC.No.1836 /2011 :3 : and pass orders in the matter which shall be done at any rate within 8 weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 3rd respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/