@$ w? Wif BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT O CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP (C) No. LCggv [2010 PETITIONER _ x Shubham Shri Lakhan Kumar Prasad Kaiwart, Kaiwarth, S/o. OW§\FV/f laged Tilkeja, about Tahsil 2O years, Korba, R/o. District Village Korba (C.G.) Versus / Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education through Secretary, Pension Bada, Raipur (C.G.) RESPONDENT WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE ISSUANCE 2 6 OF ’THE OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA /WRITS , FOR ORDER/ ORDER$ APPROPRIATE WRIT DIRECTIONZ DIRECTIONS ETC. F I-HGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0. 6956 of2010 PETITIONER : Shubham Kumar Kaiwart. VERSUS RESPONDENT? : Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA , \g§_ SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. A nihotri J. Present: Shri Rajesh Kumar Shanna, Advocate for the petitioner. I Shri R.S.Patel, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 01“ day of December, 2010) ‘ By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 25.1 1.2010 (Annexure P/l) and further to direct the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner, sympathetically for correction ofhis date of birth in the mark-sheet of class 10“} The facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner is a student of Bachelor of Arts (Part II). The petitioner passed Primary Certificate Examination in the year 2002 and Pre-Middle School Examination in the year 2005. In the year 2006-07, the petitioner appeared in the class 10m examination. The petitioner was declared / V ‘- . passed but 1n the mark-sheet, his date of b1rth was shown as 04.09.1991 instead of 04.08.1991 (AnnexureeP/4). The petitioner approached the principal of the school, who sent a letter to the respondent with regard to correction of his date of birth in the mark sheet on 04.09.2010 (Annexure P/S). Vide the impugned order dated 23.11.2010 (Annexure P/l) the application of the petitioner for correction of his date of birth in the mark-sheet, was rejected on the ground that since the petitioner has approached after lapse of three years, thus, under the rules, no correction can be made. 3. Per contra, Shri Patel, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner has taken more than three years to raise this issue when the Board has decided not to entertain any application for correction of date of birth if the same is made after a period of three years. Accordingly, no amendment/correction can be made. In support of his contention, leamed counsel relies on a decision of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, i.e. Rajbali Singh v. Board ofSecondary Education, Bhopal]. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for thepparties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. On perusal of the pleadings, it is found that the petitioner has not indicated any date as to when the petitioner has made the application to the respondent after he received the mark-sheet of class 10th (Annexure P/4). The petitioner has further not indicated anything Whether he has received any response from any authority at any point of time. 5. Rule 7, 8 and 9 of the Chhattisgarh/Madhya Pradesh Date of Birth (Entries in the School Register) Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred t0 as ‘the Rules, 1973’), reads as under: q- ‘ 2001 (2) MPLJ 276 “7. Rectification of mistake. — If the parent or the guardian finds any mistake in the date of birth mentioned in the school record, progress report or‘ in other school documents or register vis-a-vis the declaration made at the time of the first admission of the- student, he shall make an application to the ‘9 z\ head of institution explaining the incorrectness. 1n the case of a clerical mistake the head of the institution shall eorrect the entry in accordance with the original declaration of the parent or the guardian and inform him accordingly. 8. Correction or change in the date of birth. e (1) When any correction or change sin the entry relating to the date of birth made in the declaration under rule 3 or in the school register or other school documents or record is desired, the parent or the guardian shall make an application in writing to the head of the institution containing sufficient evidence as to the incorrectness of the original entry and adequate explanation and reasons for the mistake alongwith the following documents, namely: - (i) Certified copy of an entry relating to the date of birth in the register of local authority or the Hospital or the Maternity Home 0r the Primary Health Centre. (ii) Affidavit sworn by the parents or the guardian before a fist class Magistrate regarding the correction, or change required and the correct date of birth of each living or dead child born of the same mother. (iii) Any document or evidence, showing the correct date ofbirth. (2) The application shall be accompanied by a copy of Challan in proof of the payment of rupees five in the Government Treasury. (3) The Head of the Institution shall enquire into the application personally and forward it to the competent authority concerned for disposal alongwith his report. (4) On receipt of the application and report the competent authority shall aher making such enquiry as it may consider necessary, shall record a finding thereto and if it is satisfied that the correction or change in the entry of the date of birth should be made, he shall record an order t0 that effect which shall be communicated forthwith to the applicant. A copy of order so passed shall also be sent to the Head of the institution concerned who shall accordingly correct the date of birth in the school registers and other school documents‘or records. 9. Restriction on Entertaining the application for correction in date of birth. — No application for correction in date of birth recorded in school * records shall be entertained under rules 7 and 8 after the form of the Board’s examination at the end of secondary level of education has been sent to the Board or after the student has left the school, if the student has not pursued education upto the end of secondary standar . ” On barebperusal of the provisions of Rule 7, 8 and 9 of the ‘the Rules, 1973, it is clear that no request for change/correction of date of birth would be entertained after expiry of three years from the. date of issue of the mark-sheet. In the case on hand, class 10m mark-sheet was issued in March—April 2007 and the application for correction was made on 04.09.2010 i.e. after expiry of period of three years. 7. In Rajbalil, learned Single Judge of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has observed as under: “7. On bare reading of the aforesaid Rules it is absolutely clear that certain stages are provided for correction or change in the date Bf birth. Rule 9 makes it categorically clear that no application in regard to date of birth shall be entertained either under Rule 7 or 8 after the form for the Board’s examination at the end of secondary level of education has been sent to the Board or after the student has left the school, if the student has not pursued education upto the end of secondary standard. Thus, the school authorities have no power to rectify the mistake after the forms are sent to the Board. On a perusal of the Rules, it is graphically clear that there is no provision for correction of date of birth by'the Board. In absence of any provision in the Rules the Board is entitled under law- to provide guidelines for correction of date of birth. The Board has framed guidelines which have been brought on record as Annexure, P-2. The said guidelines provide that on compliance of certain formalities there can be rectification of the date of birth. It has been laid dGWn therein that the prayer for rectification or correction of date of birth would not be accepted after three years. Submission of Mr. Jain, learned Senior Counsel g3 is that in absence of any limitation in the Rules the Board could not have provided a period of limitation in the guidelines. In my considered opinion as the Rules do not deal with the period of limitation the Board has the authority to stipulate a time limit for correction of the date of birth and I do not perceive any error in such a provision.” Having regard to the statutory provisions enshrined in Rule 7, 8 and 9 ofthe Rules, 1973, no correction can be made after expiry of three years. Even otherwise, the mistake if any which crept in the mark-sheet issued in March-April, 2007 cannot be corrected at this stage by issuing a writ in favour of the petitioner. at ~ Thus, n0 relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, on the request of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to the competent civil jurisdiction, for declaration of his date of birth, if so advised. #// ' .\ Sdl- sansh K. Agnihomt Judge Amit