IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2011 / 23RD POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36524 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- KIRAN NATH.S., S/O.SURESH NATH, AGED 21, RESIDING AT KAVITHA, OLD KARAKKAMANDAPAM, NEMOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.J.S.AJITHKUMAR SRI.T.S.ABDUL VAHAB RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ THE SECRETARY & CHIEF EXECUTIVE COUNCIL FOR ICSE EXAMINATION, PRAGATI HOUSE, 3RD FLOOR, 47-48 NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI-110 505. SRI.RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, SC, ICSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 36524 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 13th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. Petitioner was a student of Christ Nagar Higher Secondary School, Thiruvananthapuram affiliated to the respondent. In the school records, his date of birth was entered as 31/5/91 instead of 16/11/89. As a result of the above mistake, when certificates were issued by the respondent, his date of birth was wrongly shown. Subsequently, petitioner made an application to the school for correction of his date of birth, which was forwarded to the respondent. That request of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent by order dated 16th December, 2010. The reasons stated in the said communication, a copy of which has been produced as Ext.P5 along with IA 315/11 are that, correction should be applied for within one year of passing the examination, and that, in case of belated request, the application will be considered where such changes have been permitted by a court of law. 3. As far as the delay in making request which is now WPC No. 36524/10 :2 : relied on against the petitioner is concerned, in several cases of this nature, including in WA 1948/08 and in Ext.P4 judgment, this Court has held that even belated requests are liable to be entertained and considered on merits. If that be the situation, the request of the petitioner could not have been rejected on the ground of delay. 4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition setting aside Ext.P5 and directing respondent to reconsider the request of the petitioner for correction of his date of birth and pass orders in the light of the materials produced by him. Orders shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Needless to say that if the date of birth is corrected, such correction shall be carried out in the records and the certificates already issued. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp