CW 7039/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.7039/2008 Surendra Pal Singh Versus C.B.S.E. & Another. Date of Order ::: 17/07/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Satish Pachori, for petitioner Mr. Virendra Lodha, for respondents Instant petition has been filed seeking direction against Central Board of Secondary Education, for making appropriate corrections in father's name of petitioner in mark sheets of Class-X & XII in which he appeared in academic sessions-2004 & 2006 respectively. Main grievance raised herein is that in fact name of petitioner's father is “Guru Charan Singh Shergil” but any how, in mark sheets of Class-X & XII, by an error, it has been shown as “Sher Gill“ and not as “Guru Charan Singh Shergil” - in absence whereof, he is facing difficulty while pursuing his further studies; and accordingly, submitted application dt. 12/07/07 making request for change in his father's name as “Guru Charan Singh Shergil”, almost after about four years having elapsed whereas he was issued mark sheet of Class-X way back in May, 2004 wherein his father's name was shown as “Sher Gill“, in which if at all there CW 7039/08 //2// was any error or rectification was required therein, opportunity was available with him to immediately submit application before competent authority seeking change in name of his father, if desired. Document has been placed by petitioner to show that his father's name is “Guru Charan Singh Shergil” while at the same time, CBSE has also produced document including examination forms filed by petitioner, in which his father's name is shown as ““Sher Gill“ and not “Guru Charan Singh Shergil” as claimed by petitioner. Since there is a factual dispute being raised with regard to father's name of petitioner and documents placed by parties on record, such factual disputes cannot be resolved by this Court U/Art.226 of the Constitution. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. However, petitioner will be at liberty to avail of remedy under law and it is made clear that observations made (supra) would not be read which may cause prejudice. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p2/7039CW08-Jul17-Ds.doc