IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 27101 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUHAMMAD SANISH S/O KI RASHEED KOMMACHI IKKATH THALIPARMBA,KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL, P.E.S VIDYALAYA, EDT PO, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670 327. 2. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, J.BLOCK 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR WEST CHENNAI-600 040. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, SIKSHA KENDRA 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, NEW DELHI-11 092. 4. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION J.BLOCK 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR WEST CHENNAI-600 040. SC SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 27101 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1- THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE DTD. 14/06/2011 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATH OF PAYYANNUR MUNCIPALITY EXT.P2- THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF ADMISSION REGISTER OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 11/05/2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3- THE TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 28/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4- THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 26/08/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. (True copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).27101/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 13th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner was a student of the school of which the first respondent is the Principal. School is affiliated to respondents 2 to 4. In the School records and certificates issued by the CBSE, petitioner's father's name is shown as “Abdul Rasheed”, whereas as per his Birth certificate, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P1, petitioner's father's name is “Rasheed.K.I.” 2. Seeking correction of the aforesaid mistake, petitioner made an application which was rejected by the second respondent as per Ext.P4 mainly stating that in terms of the CBSE Examination Bye-laws, corrections are to be initially made by the School authorities and that it is only thereafter, can the request of the petitioner be considered by the CBSE. According to the petitioner, School authorities take the stand that the correction is to be carried out by the CBSE authorities. It is complaining of the contradictory stand taken by the authorities, the writ petition has been filed. W.P.(C).27101/11 2 3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 4. 4. It is submitted by the Standing Counsel that if a student has a complaint that any mistake has been committed in the School records and certificates issued by the CBSE, student has to make an application to the School concerned and that it is for the School authorities to consider the request and that only after correction in the School records are made, the papers are sent to the CBSE for effecting correction in their records and certificates. In this case, on receipt of the application from the petitioner, without making any correction in the School records, the first respondent forwarded the application to the second respondent, who rejected the same by Ext.P4. 5. Since the CBSE Examination Bye-laws are as submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the CBSE, necessarily the first respondent should consider the application of the petitioner initially and only if the School records are corrected, he need forward the papers to the second respondent. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions W.P.(C).27101/11 3 Petitioner shall make a fresh application to the first respondent requesting for correction of his father's name in the School records and CBSE certificates. On receipt of the application and supporting documents, first respondent shall consider the request and if the request is allowed, the papers shall thereafter, be forwarded to the second respondent. on receipt thereof, the second respondent shall consider the matter and pass appropriate orders in the matter. First respondent shall complete the aforesaid exercise within four weeks of receipt of the application and the second respondent shall complete the process within eight weeks of its receipt. 6. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs