IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26025 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DHARMASREE K.K., VELIYESHATHU, CHITTOOR, CHAVARA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.MATHEW SUNNY SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, CHENNAI-14. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, SREE BUDHA CENTRAL SCHOOL, EDUKULANGARA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690 562. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC FOR CBSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.26025 OF 2010(C) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P6. According to the petitioner, she was a student of the 2nd respondent school. As there was a mistake in the year of birth petitioner submitted an application to the school authorities for getting the said error corrected by the first respondent. Accordingly, the matter was forwarded to the first respondent and the first respondent conveyed rejection of the petitioner's request to the 2nd respondent. Thereupon the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P6 to the petitioner. The reason stated in Ext.P6 for rejection of the request of the petitioner is clause 6(9) of the Examination Bye Laws of the CBSE. In other words it is on the ground of delay that the request of the petitioner seems to be returned. 2. This court has already in the judgment in W.A. No.1948/2008 and several other writ petitions including W.P(c). No.24322/2010, has taken the view that irrespective of the said regulation, the applications made for correction of date of birth are liable to be considered on merits and orders shall be passed. WPC.No. /09 :2 : In that view of the matter, rejection of the application is unsustainable and for that reason I quash Ext.P6. 3. Petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent, who shall thereupon forward the application submitted by the petitioner along with a copy of the judgments referred to above to the 1st respondent, who on receipt of the application and documents, shall pass fresh orders duly adverting to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgments. The 1st respondent shall pass orders in the manner as directed above within 6 weeks. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/