cg; (@a $§§§§LE gEN$H IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT‘OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION {C}No. M‘R’Eo OF 2010 Q11. ’I‘wirlkle Verma @ Anupa Verma D/o Shri G.L. Verma aged about 14 years, Minor Represented through her natural guardian father G.L. Verma S/o Late K.P. Verma, aged about 52 years,‘ R/o G—53, Sulya Apartment, Model Town, Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G‘.) Versus / 1) Central Board of Secondary Education, Through its Secretary, Regional Office, Todarmal Marg, Ajmer-305QOI (Rajasthan) 2) Krishna Public School, through its Principal, Nehru ‘Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226’ OF CONSTITUTION OF‘INDIA PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS : HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 4830 of2010 PETITIONER : Ku. Twinkle Verma @ Anupa Verma. VERSUS Central Board of Secondary Educatoin & Another. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’hle Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shti Sachin Singh Rajput, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.R.Patankar, Advocate for the respondent No. 1. RESPONDENTS ORDER ORAL (Passed on 02“ day of August, 201 1) Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that by notification in the oftcial gagette (Annexure P/Z), the name of the petitioner has been changed nom Twinkle Verma to Anupa Verma. After 02.07.2010, Twinkle Verma has become Anupa Verma. Thus, all the authorities including the respondent No. 1 should entertain her application for admission as well as for other purpose in the name ofAnupa Velma. The petitioner has not cited any example where the petitioner has made an application alongwith a copy of the gazette notitication and the application has been rejected. Thus, if the application is made for any admission or examination in the name of Ku. Anupa Venna, there is no reason not to consider the same. However, no direction can be made to the respondent No. l“ for change of the name in the marksheet and other documents, prior to 02.07.20 1.0. In view of the above, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the authorities mesh pointing out the development as notified in gazette notification dated 02.07.2010 (Annexure P/2) for necessary correction. The respondent No. 1 authorities shall consider the representation in accordance with law, on its own merit afresh and pass appropriate Order. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of Sd/ a ‘ Satish K. Agnihotri i ’ Judge ' Amit z