IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2011 / 31ST BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23666 of 2011(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- JITHIN GEORGE, S/O.K.V.GEORGE, KIRIYANTHAN HOUSE, NJARAKKAL PIN 682 505, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.J.MATHEW SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL,THE DELTA STUDY, TOWER ROAD, FORT KOCHI, COCHIN - 682 001. 2. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CBSE, REGIONAL OFFICE, 16TH MAIN ROAD ANNA NAGAR, WEST CHENNAI 600 101. 3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS CBSE, NEW DELHI-1. R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC, CBSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 23666 of 2011(G) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MURIYAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH 06.03.2010. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE ALL INDIA SECONDARY SCHOOL EXAMINATION - 2004 CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26.5.2004. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26.05.2010. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.07.2010. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.09.2010. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO. 1949/2008 DATED 5.08.2009 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 24611/2009 DATED 27.01.2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 23666 of 2011 G ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petitioner was a student of the school of which the first respondent is the Principal. The school is affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education. 2. According to the petitioner, though his date of birth is 03.08.1988, in the school records and Ext.P2 certificate issued by the 2nd and 3rd respondents, his date of birth has been wrongly recorded as 08.08.1988. It is stated that in order to get the aforesaid mistake corrected, he made an application to the first respondent. On its receipt, the first respondent forwarded the application to the second respondent by Ext.P3, enclosing the documents submitted by the petitioner. It is stated that in spite of Ext.P4 reminder of the first respondent, orders were not passed by the second respondent and, therefore, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 representation to the second respondent which was W.P.(C) No.23666/2011 : 2 : also not responded. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed, seeking orders for correcting the date of birth of the petitioner and in support of his contentions, petitioner is relying on Exts.P6 and P7 judgments of this Court. 3. I heard the Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. Two submissions are made by the Standing Counsel. One is that, clause 69 of the CBSE Examination Bye-laws provides that application for correction of date of birth should be made within two years of the student completing his schooling. It is stated that the application made by the petitioner is belated and, therefore, is liable to be rejected. In so far as this contention of the Standing Counsel is concerned, in Exts.P6 and P7 judgments referred to above, it has been held that irrespective of the time frame specified in the bye-laws, even belated applications made by students seeking correction of their date of birth and such other particulars, are liable to be entertained and considered. W.P.(C) No.23666/2011 : 3 : Therefore, this contention is liable to be rejected. 4. The second contention raised by the learned Standing Counsel is that, under the bye-laws of the CBSE, on receipt of the application from a student, the Principal of the school is to consider the same and if corrections are made in the school records, thereafter only the application is to be forwarded to the CBSE for correcting the certificates issued by them. It is stated that in this case, it was without correcting the school records that the Principal forwarded the application to the CBSE and, therefore, the CBSE is unable to consider the application. 5. In the light of the regulations as above, if correction is not ordered by the CBSE, this Court will not be justified in finding fault with the CBSE. Therefore, the first respondent will have to consider the application of the petitioner initially and if correction of school records is allowed, then, the application has to be forwarded to the second respondent, who has to then consider the matter. W.P.(C) No.23666/2011 : 4 : 6. In view of the above, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:- (i) That it will be open to the petitioner to make a fresh application to the first respondent, enclosing a copy of this judgment and if such an application is made by the petitioner, the first respondent will consider the same in the light of the documents produced and if the school records are corrected, the application of the petitioner and other documents will be forwarded to the second respondent, who shall consider the same and orders thereon shall be passed. (ii) The first respondent shall complete the aforesaid process within four weeks of receipt of the application from the petitioner and the second respondent shall comply with the aforesaid directions within eight weeks of receipt of the documents from the first respondent. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/22/09 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge