IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2008 / 20TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4054 of 2008(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------- VINEETH V.S., S/O. VINOD BABU, ASHWINI (B-300), GANDHI NAGAR, 3RD STREET, VAZHUTHACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, DELHI. 2. THE JOINT SECRETARY, CBSE, REGIONAL OFFICE, PLOT NO.1630-H, 'J' BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI-40. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, CHINMAYA VIDYALAYA, ATTUKAL, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.R4: THE PRINCIPAL, CHINMAYA VIDYALAYA, VAZHUTHACAUD, VAZHUTHACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.R5: THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, NEW DELHI. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 26.3.2008 IN IA NO.4102/08) BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FOR R2 SMT.T.G.SEETHAL FOR R2 SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. FOR R3-4 SRI.G.P.SHINOD FOR R3-4 SRI.MANU V. FOR R3-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 4054 of 2008 EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY R1. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 1.1.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.1.2008. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE CBSE BYE-LAW. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.4054 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner passed the Secondary School Examination in the year 2005. Ext.P1 is the certificate issued by the 1st respondent to the petitioner in respect of that examination. Therein the petitioner’s date of birth is entered as 4.1.1990. The date of birth of the petitioner is actually 4.1.1988. This is clear from Ext.P2 extract from the Birth Register in relation to the petitioner. However, at the time when the petitioner was admitted to the School, his late grand father gave the date of birth wrongly as 4.1.1990. This happened to be carried over to Ext.P1 certificate also. The petitioner now seeks correction of the date of birth in the School records as well as Ext.P1 certificate. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 who also filed a statement wherein he relies on Ext.P5 rules relating to correction of mistakes in the certificates. According to him, going by Ext.P5, at this point of time correction cannot be made. He also raises the contention that only W.P.(c)No.4054/08 2 correction of mistakes can be made and changes in the date of birth cannot be made. 3. This Court had occasion to consider the question of correction of dates of birth in CBSE School records and certificates, in which a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.37476/04 had held thus: “This writ petition is filed with the following prayer: i) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or appropriate writs or directions commanding the respondents to correct the dates of birth of petitioners in their school records and in their mark lists and certificates of secondary school Examination as in the Birth Certificates issued by the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram.” The request is rejected on the ground that as per clause 69.2(iv) of the Examination Bye laws of the CBSE the changes regarding the correction of date of birth should be entertained by the Board only if an application for the same is forwarded by the head of School within 2 years of the date of declaration of class X Examination. The 1 st petitioner passed the examination in 1997 and the 2 nd in 2001. But the applications are filed beyond two years. A copy of the relevant bye laws is produced as Ext.R1(1). The relevant clause reads as follows: i) No change in the date of birth once recorded in the Board’s record shall be made. However, corrections to correct typographical and other errors to make the certificate consistent with the school records can be made provided that corrections in the school records should not have been made after the submission of W.P.(c)No.4054/08 3 application form for admission to Examination to the Board. ii) Such correction in Date of Birth of candidate in case of genuine clerical errors will be made under orders of the Chairman where it is established to the satisfaction of the Chairman that the wrong entry was made erroneously in the list of candidates/application form of the candidate for the examination. iii) Request for correction in Date of Birth shall be forwarded by the Head of the School along with attested Photostat copies of: a) Application for admission of the candidate to the school. b) Portion of the page of admission and withdrawal register where entry in date of birth has been made. c) The School Leaving Certificate of the previous school submitted at the time of admission. iv) The application for correction in date of birth duly forwarded by the Head of School along with documents mentioned in byelaws 69.2 (iii) shall be entertained by the Board only within two years of the date of declaration of result of Class X examination. No correction whatsoever shall be made on application submitted after the said period of two years. This will be effective from the examination to be held in March 1995. The reading of the provision would show that the same is insisted for administrative convenience. Prescription of a period and prescription of a cut off date under law are made for reasons. In a given situation rigorous instance of the cut off date may be necessary in order to avoid prejudice to third parties, in order to avoid disturbance to settled positions, in order to avoid an otherwise unavoidable inconvenience etc. As far as matters like the one referred to in the writ petition is W.P.(c)No.4054/08 4 concerned correction of date of birth in school record whether any such factors have a role to play is the question. The case of the petitioners is that the mistake itself was noticed only when they took steps to apply for passport. I do not think it is necessary for this court to go into the merits of the case since the rejection of the application is not on merits. Even otherwise, there is no case for the respondents that the application cannot be entertained on merits. It is also seen that the petitioners had pursued an illadvised attempt by approaching the court of Judicial 1 st Class Magistrate, Nedumangad and getting orders for publishing the correct date of birth in the gazette. The corrected date of birth according to the petitioners has been published also in the gazette as can be seen from Ext.P4. Be that as it may, there is no question of any third party interest getting involved in the case. There is no situation of any prejudice or loss to any other person: it is a situation of certainly some administrative inconvenience to the respondents. Law is not helpless in such a situation and the court certainly is not powerless also. It is only in the interest of justice that the provision is declared as directory and not mandatory. It is declared so. In the facts and circumstances of the case there will be a direction to the respondents to take action on the applications filed by the petitioners for correction of date of birth ignoring the objection that the applications were not filed within two years. The needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner.” Therefore, that judgment has become final wherein the 1st respondent was also a party. I am of opinion that the ratio of W.P.(c)No.4054/08 5 that judgment squarely applies not only to correction of dates of birth but also changes in School records, if the changes are requested for on the basis of authoritative documents in support of the claim for change. In this case, Ext.P2 clearly shows that the petitioner’s date of birth is 4.1.1988. Therefore, I am of opinion that the additional 4th respondent should make corrections in the School records regarding the petitioner’s date of birth, if the original of Ext.P2 is produced before him. The 1st respondent is liable to make appropriate changes in Ext.P1 certificate on the basis of such changes in the School records. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. If the petitioner files a proper application before the additional 4th respondent along with the original of Ext.P2 extract from the Birth Register, the additional 4th respondent shall make appropriate changes in the date of birth of the petitioner in the School records and intimate that such correction of date of birth has been so made, to the 1st respondent. The additional 4th respondent shall do the same within a period of two weeks from the date of application from the petitioner along with a certified copy of this judgment. On receipt of the W.P.(c)No.4054/08 6 communication from the additional 4th respondent, the 1st respondent shall make appropriate changes in Ext.P1 certificate or issue a fresh certificate with the corrected date of birth therein within another period of two weeks therefrom. The writ petition is allowed as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.4054/08 7