IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 4494 of 2010(J) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SIVAKUMAR.S., S/O.SOMAN P.K., PUTHUVAL NIKARTH, VAYALAR P.O., CHERTHALA- ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. MR.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM), MR.PRASANTH M.P. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NEW NO.3, 'J'BLOCK, 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, JAWAHR NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA, CHENNITHALA P.O., ALAPPUZHA. 3. REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATHS, VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY. R1 BY MR.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, S.C, CBSE, ADVS. MR.K.M.ANEESH, MR.SANTHOSH KUMAR.K. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 4494 of 2010-J - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 order whereby the request for correction of date of birth in the school records, has been rejected by the first respondent. The petitioner has completed the Higher Secondary Education from the second respondent school. Ext.P1 is the copy of the certificate issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education. Thereafter, he joined the Pre-Sea Training Course conducted by the Samudra Institute of Marine Studies, Mumbai. After completing the said course, it was found that the original date of birth shown in the Birth Certificate issued by the third respondent varies with the date of birth shown in the admission register of the school. The original date of birth of the petitioner as shown in the birth certificate issued by the third respondent was 16.6.1991 whereas the date of birth shown in Ext.P1 was 14.4.1991. Ext.P2 is the copy of the birth certificate issued by the third respondent. The petitioner submitted an application, Ext.P3 for correction of date of birth through the second respondent. Ext.P4 is the reply sent to the second respondent stating that the request for correction of date of birth was wpc4494 /2010 2 rejected since the application for correction would not be entertained after two years of the date of declaration of the results of Class X Examination. In Ext.P4, Rule 69(2)(iv) of the Examination Byelaws, is referred to. Seeking for a direction to the first respondent to correct the date of birth of the petitioner in accordance with Ext.P3 application submitted by him through the second respondent, this writ petition has been filed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the CBSE. 3. This Court has already considered similar matters in various writ petitions. The view taken in Ext.P4 cannot be supported in the light of the various judgments of this Court including W.A. No.1948/2008 and connected cases. In W.A. No.1948/2008 and connected cases, a Division Bench of this Court considered the matter elaborately. In the said case, this Court had passed an interim order on 1.4.2009, para 4 of which reads as follows: “After having heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides, we are of the view that in the interest of justice the matter should be considered afresh by the CBSE itself. Therefore, without proceeding further as regards the question of law involved in these cases as to whether the Examination Bye-laws of the CBSE is directory or wpc4494 /2010 3 mandatory in nature, we feel that in the interest of the poor students who are placed in the unfortunate situations referred to above, the CBSE should consider their cases sympathetically, as has been done in the case of students referred to in the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above. After all, the correction is not for any undue or unmerited advantage like extension in service; but only for reconciling the date of birth as appearing in the Register of Registrar of Births and Deaths. In the above circumstances, we direct the CBSE to consider the case of the students referred to in these cases sympathetically, leaving open the question of law, and consider whether in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the situations referred to in each case, correction i the date of birth can be permitted. We make it clear that these directions are issued only in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases, and not as a general conditions.” In the judgment, the Division Bench referred to an affidavit filed by the CBSE on 4.8.2009 in the said case, wherein it was stated that pursuant to the direction issued by this Court the appellant therein had constituted a committee and the committee has decided to take appropriate action for correction of the date of birth. Relevant communication addressed by the CBSE to the Regional Office, Chennai was extracted in the said judgment wherein condition No.1 is the recommendation to correct the date of birth wpc4494 /2010 4 of the candidates who had applied to CBSE after two years as stipulated in the CBSE bye-laws and condition No.2 is to change the date of birth of the candidates who had the birth certificate which is issued by the statutory body so that they may not face any difficulty on account of inconsistent date of birth in different documents. It is clear from the said communication that the recommendation of the committee has been approved by the competent authority of the CBSE. Accordingly, the Division Bench directed the CBSE to take action for the correction of date of birth in the school records, within two weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Any outer time limit provided in the byelaws for entertaining an application cannot be taken as a bar for exercise of power and the period provided can only be termed as a period for the convenience of the administrative authorities alone. 4. In the light of the directions issued the Division Bench in the above judgment, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in this writ petition. Therefore, Ext.P4 is quashed. There will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to verify the particulars in terms of the birth certificate in original issued by the third respondent and to effect correction in the school records relating to the petitioner. Respondents 1 and 2 shall issue a corrected copy wpc4494 /2010 5 of Ext.P1 to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/