IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 27469 of 2010(G) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- R.RAJENDRA BABU, S/O.RAGHAVAN PILLAI, UPASANA, CHANTHOOR, AMBALATHUMKALA P.O., EZHUKON, KOLLAM DIST., PIN 691 505. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, NEW NO.3 (OLD NO.1630-A) M.S.BLOCK, 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI-600040. 2. REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXAMINATIONS, REGIONAL OFFICE, PLOT NO.1630, A3 BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI-600040. 3. PRINCIPAL J.NAVODAYA SCHOOL, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT.691 560. BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC FOR CBCE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 27469 of 2010 G ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Though notice was served on the third respondent, there is no appearance on his behalf. I heard the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2. 2. Petitioner challenges Ext.P4. Petitioner's son Mr.Sarath R.S. was a student of the school of which the third respondent is the Principal. According to the petitioner, when the first respondent issued pass certificate, his son's date of birth was wrongly entered as 30-05-1994 instead of 13-08- 1993. It is stated that seeking correction of the aforesaid mistake, an application was made to the third respondent, which was forwarded to the second respondent. The second respondent thereafter issued Ext.P4 order, declining the prayer sought for, mainly for two reasons. The first reason stated is that the entry in the pass certificate is as per the entries in the school records. The second reason stated is W.P.(C) No.27469/10 : 2 : that the request made is belated. 3. As far as the delay now stated in Ext.P4 is concerned, as rightly pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner, in several cases, this Court has held that irrespective of the time frame provided in clause 69 of the CBSE Examination Bye-laws for seeking correction of the date of birth, if an application is made belatedly, the authorities are bound to consider such application on merits. In that view, the delay stated in Ext.P4 cannot be a ground for rejection. 4. In so far as the first reason stated in Ext.P4, viz., that the entries in the pass certificate are as per the entries in the school records, is concerned, first of all, when a mistake is pointed out, the school will have to consider the same, correct mistake, if any, and then only forward the application to the second respondent. In this case, from the contents of Ext.P4, it would appear that such a course was not adopted by the third respondent. W.P.(C) No.27469/10 : 3 : 5. In that view of the matter, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the third respondent will consider the request of the petitioner for correction of date of birth and pass orders thereon. Once orders are passed as above and if correction is made in the school records, application made by the petitioner will be forwarded to the second respondent for fresh consideration. It is directed that if proposal is received by the second respondent as above, orders will be passed, at any rate, within six weeks thereafter. 6. In order to enable the third respondent to reconsider the matter as above, I direct that the petitioner will make a fresh application accompanied by all documents supporting his request for correction of the date of birth. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge