IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6572 of 2006 ANIL KUMAR DEV s/o Inderdeo Paswan,resident of Mahmadpur, P.S. Khodaganj, District- Nalanda. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 4. The Principal, G.M.K.High School, Islampur, Nalanda. ----------- For the Petitioner : M/s Binod Kumar Singh and Anil Kumar Singh. For the Board : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mandal. For the State : G.P.8. 3 30.11.2010 The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner for correction of his date of birth in the matriculation certificate granted by the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. A counter affidavit has been filed wherein certain basic facts have not been disputed. With the consent of the parties, this writ application has been heard for disposal at this stage itself. The petitioner has stated and it is not denied by the Bihar School Examination Board that when the petitioner registered for sitting in the Board Examination, his date of birth in the certificate of registration was shown as 5.1.1971. Similarly it is stated that when he filled up his examination form of matriculation and when the admit card was issued by the Board, all showed his date of birth as 5.1.1971. It is also stated that having passed the matriculation examination and when he was issued School Leaving Certificate by his School that also showed his date of birth as 5.1.1971. Petitioner then in future course applied for duplicate copy of the passing certificate of matriculation - 2 - examination, which was given to him on 6.12.2005. On seeing the same he realized that his date of birth was wrongly recorded as 5.7.1971. He immediately applied for correction. Apparently 5.1.1971 had been taken to be 5.7.1971. Let it be noted that the petitioner was not trying to reduce his age rather was correcting it as a consequence whereof not only his original age being restored but as per certificate, in question, it would get enhanced by six months. In the counter affidavit, primarily, the ground taken is about the delay in seeking correction. In the counter affidavit reliance has been paled on judgment of this Court in C.W.J.C No. 869 of 2007 (Rajiv Ranjan –v- The State of Bihar & ors.), disposed of on 11.12.2008. In my view the case is clearly distinguishable. What weigh with this Court for refusing correction was that the writ petition was filed sixteen years too late and further the Court held that by this change of date of birth it would seriously affect the date of retirement and held that the Court was not persuaded in the matter. Here the question is just opposite . The petitioner was admittedly given the duplicate certificate in December, 2005. The writ petition was filed in 2006 for correction of his date of birth as entry therein . Secondly, the petitioner is not seeking to reduce his age so as to increase his service period rather he is seeking to increase his date of birth . In my view, learned counsel for the petitioner rightly submits that he is doing so only to clear ambiguity caused by this - 3 - wrong entry. In view of the fact that the Board does not deny that the registration certificate, the admit card, all showed his date of birth as 5.1.1971. Surely, the matriculation duplicate certificate is wrong. Board is accordingly directed to correct the same showing the date of birth of the petitioner as 5.1. 1971. All entries to the contrary are held to be wrong. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. However, it is expected that the Board would issue corrected certificate within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this order before the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)