IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19625 of 2010 Gautam, S/o Sri Surendra Prasad Singh, resident of Village Doman Bigaha, P.S. Hasua, District Nawada……………………………..………….Petitioner Versus 1. The Bihar School Examination Board through the Secretary, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 3. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 4. The Head Master, High School, Hasua, Nawada. 5. The Head Master, Middle School, Bajra, Hasua, Nawada…………………………………………………..…..Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. P.N. Shahi, Advocate For the State: Mr. Girijesh, Advocate. 3 22.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents. Though this application has been listed under the heading “For orders”, with consent of the parties, the same is being heard and disposed of finally. Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the respondent-Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as „the Board‟) to correct his date of birth as „15.11.1981‟ instead of „01.03.1981‟ mentioned on the matriculation certificate issued by the Board. Learned counsel for the Board has 2 rightly submitted that petitioner had got knowledge that his date of birth was wrongly mentioned in the matriculation certificate issued by the Board on 14.12.1995, as contained in Annexure-3, the moment he received the certificate. Since then petitioner has used the certificate at many stages and for many purposes during the last 15 years but he never made an attempt to get the date of birth corrected and has moved this Court only in 2010. Though the petitioner has annexed his two representations addressed to the Secretary of the Board as contained in Annexure-4 dated 23.12.2008 and as contained in Annexure- 5 dated 17.05.2010, learned counsel for the Board submits that there is no proof of receiving of the said applications in the Board and copies of the same are also not available. He submits that as the delay in approaching the Board and this Court is of almost 15 years, the writ application should be dismissed on that very ground. He has also placed reliance upon an order of this Court as 3 contained in Annexure-A with the counter affidavit. The contention of the learned counsel for the Board is right and the writ application is fit to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches on the part of the petitioner. However, in paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Board it is stated that in the light of the writ petition, the Board has issued a letter to the Headmaster, High School, Hasua, Nawada on 18.01.2011 calling for certain registers and documents in connection with the grievance of the petitioner. There was no order by this Court in this case directing the Board to do the same. It is only on receipt of a copy of the writ application of the petitioner that the Board has issued the said letter on its own to the Headmaster. In the circumstances, though no positive direction can be issued to the Board to consider the claim of the petitioner in view of the delay in the 4 matter, but it is observed that if the Board is satisfied beyond any doubt, after scrutiny of the original document, as called for by the said letter dated 18.01.2011, the Board will be at liberty correct the mistake on equitable considerations. This is made clear that absence of the records shall not go in favour of the petitioner and only if on the basis of unimpeachable documents and materials, the Board is satisfied beyond any doubt that a bona fide mistake had occurred in the certificate, it will be at liberty to correct the same. However, it is clarified that no mandamus is being issued for the same and full liberty is granted to the Board to proceed in the matter and take a decision as it may deem fit and proper. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)