IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 25910 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VISHNU A., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. SHRI AJAYA KUMAR, RESIDING AT VISHNUVILASM, P.O. MALUR,PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.P.SHYNI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CETNRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SHIKSHA KENDRA,2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, DELHI-110092. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, SHIKSHA KENDRA,2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, DELHI-110092. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, CORDOVA PUBLIC SCHOOL, N.H.BYE PASS, CORDOVA NAGAR, POONTHURA P.O. AMBALATHARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 026. 4. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CE NTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, NEW NO.3, (OLD NO.1630-A), J.BLOCK, ANNA NAGAR (WEST), CHENNAI - 600 040. 5. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, SHASTHRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. ADV. SHRI.C.RASHEED, CGC FOR R5 MR.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASG MR.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC FOR CBSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.25910 of 2010 (K) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 31st day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard both sides. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is regarding Ext.P3 order dated 13/04/2010 passed by the 1st respondent rejecting an application made by the petitioner for correction of his date of birth and the name of his mother in the school records. A reading of Ext.P3 shows that the request has been rejected mainly relying on Rule 69.2 of the Examination Bye-Laws of the Board. 3. Dealing with identical contentions raised by the CBSE relying on the aforesaid provisions, a Division Bench of this Court has rendered Ext.P4 judgment dated 05/08/2009 in W.A.No.1948/2008 & connected cases. If the principles laid down in Ext.P4 judgment are to be applied, necessarily, the claim of the petitioner deserves consideration on merits. Since such a consideration was not given to the request of the petitioner, Ext.P3 deserves to be set aside and I do so. The 4th respondent is directed WP(C) No.25910/2010 -2- to reconsider the application of the petitioner in the light of Ext.P4 judgment rendered by this Court in WA No.1948/2008 & connected cases and pass fresh orders in the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. It is made clear that it will be open to the 3rd respondent to call upon the petitioner to produce any additional document as he deems fit. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg