IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17610 of 2011(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- APARANA.S,(MINOR),D/O.SREEKUMAR.M.S, LAKSHMI KRIPA,PARIYARAM PO,KADAMURY,KOTTAYAM, REP.BY HER NEXT FRIEND SREEKUMAR M.S,(FATHER). BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, 1630 A,J-BLOCK,ANNA NAGAR WEST, CHENNAI 600 040,REP.BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY. 2. ASSISTANT SECRETARY,CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, 1630 A, J-BLOCK,ANNA NAGAR WEST,CHENNAI 600 040. 3. THE PRINCIPAL CARDINAL PADIYARA PUBLIC SCHOOL,MANIMALA,KOTTAYAM 686 543. SC SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17610 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE CLASS X MARK LIST ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER REJECTING THE CHANGE OF DATE OF BIRTH ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT (True Copy) P.A To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J .......................................... W.P.(C).17610/2011 .......................................... Dated this the 8th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner was a student of the school of which the third respondent is the Principal. According to the petitioner, her correct dated of birth is 19.12.1994 whereas in the school records it was recorded as 18.12.1994. In order to get the aforesaid mistake corrected, she made an application to the School authorities. Without correcting the school records, the Principal appears to have forwarded the application to respondents 1 and 2. By Ext.P4, the application has been rejected by the second respondent stating that it is belated and that the date of birth in the school records is not corrected. It is on receipt of Ext.P4 that the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2. As far as the delay held against the petitioner is concerned, similar issue was considered by this Court in W.A.1948/2008, and it was held that even in spite of the time frame fixed in the CBSE bye- laws, belated applications made are liable to be considered on merits. In the light of the said judgment, the delay mentioned in Ext.P4 cannot be a ground for rejection of the application. W.P.(C).17610/11 2 3. However, I find merit in the contention raised by the learned counsel on behalf of the CBSE that on receipt of the application, it is for the school authorities to consider the request in the first instance and if necessary correction is made in the school records, then the application has to be forwarded to respondents 1 and 2 for making corrections in their records. According to him, since the school authorities have not made necessary correction, it is for them to consider the request of the petitioner afresh. 4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:- That it will be open to the petitioner to make a fresh application to the third respondent who, on receipt of the same, will consider the application, in the light of the materials produced and if correction is made in the school records, records will thereafter be forwarded to the second respondent who shall consider the matter and pass appropriate orders on the application for correction and the certificate shall be issued to the petitioner. W.P.(C).17610/11 3 Third respondent shall complete the aforesaid process within four weeks of receipt of the application and the second respondent shall also complete the process within eight weeks of its receipt from the third respondent. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs