IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7124 OF 2011 "Govind Shivkumar Shep Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Govind s/o. Shivkumar Shep Age 25 years, Occ. Educated Unemployee, r/o. Irrigation Colony, Parli Vaijnath, Tq.Parli (V), District Beed. ..PETITIONER. VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Education Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2] The Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education,Pune, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, through its Divisional Secretary. 3] Navin Madhyamic Vidyalaya, Vidya Nagar, Parli Vaijnath District Beed, through its Head Master. .. RESPONDENTS. ----- Mr. R.T. Nagargoje, Advocate holding for Mr. G.R. Nagargoje, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.H. Dighe, AGP for respondent No.1 Mr. V.R. Sonwalkar, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. G.D. Kale, Advocate for respondent No.3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7124 OF 2011 "Govind Shivkumar Shep Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 5TH OCTOBER, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT [B.R. GAVAI, J.] :- 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties. 2] By way of present petition, the petitioner prays for directions to the respondent No.2 to for correcting the entries in respect of name of the petitioner in the SSC certificate, so also, in respect of his date of birth. 3] The petition is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent Board on the ground that the SCC Board vide communication dated 8th September, 2009, have modified the rules and application for change in entry cannot be entertained after a period of 3 years from the receipt of the certificate. 4] This court, in the matter of "Shankar Pandharinath Nagare Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others " in W.P. No.972 of 2011 and 6729/2011, has held that the said amendment would IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7124 OF 2011 "Govind Shivkumar Shep Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 3 not operate retrospectively and would be operative only from 8th September, 2009. 5] Admittedly, the petitioner has passed his SSC examination in the year March 2003. In that view of the matter, reliance placed by the respondent Board on the said amendment would not be of any assistance to the case of the respondents. 6] In any way, it is clear that the mistake is inadvertent and though, may be attributable to the Board itself. Whereas, the entire record of the petitioner would show that his surname is mentioned as Shep, in the Certificate in question, it is erroneously recorded as Sheph. It seems that that the last “h” has been incorrectly added in the certificate. 7] The petitioner is also seeking change in the entry with respect to the date of birth. From the communication of the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed, it can be seen that the petitioner's date of birth is incorrectly mentioned as 22.5.1986, whereas, in fact, it should be 22.3.1986. In so far as claim regarding correction of date of birth is concerned, the difference is only of 2 months. It can thus be seen that the petitioner is not likely to gain anything if the date of birth is directed to be corrected. As stated above, report of the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, support the contention of the petitioner that the date is IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7124 OF 2011 "Govind Shivkumar Shep Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 4 incorrectly mentioned. 8] In that view of the matter, we allow the petition and pass the following order :- [i] The writ petition is allowed. [ii] We direct the respondent No.2 to carry out correction in the surname of the petitioner, i.e. Shep instead of Sheph and in the date of birth, i.e. 22.3.1986 instead of 22.5.1986, in his SSC Certificate and mark memo. Rule made absolute in above terms, with no orders as to costs. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-