Mohd. Taiyab vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 10790 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 32
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9073 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Mohd. Taiyab
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- A.T. Pandey
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Hridai Narain Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

Heard Sri A.T. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri H.N. Pandey, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4.

Today, at the very outset, Sri H.N. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the Central Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter called as 'Board') submitted that while filling up name of father of petitioner in form for Class-X examination, 'Mohd.' was not included in his name but subsequent to the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Jigya Yadav (Minor) (through guardian/father Hari Singh) Versus C.B.S.E. (Central Board of Secondary Education) & ors., Civil Appeal no.3905of2011, decided on 03.06.2021, the petitioner may approach the Institution from where he has passed the said examination and move an application requesting for including 'Mohd.' in the name of his father in the records of the Institution.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view of statement so made, I direct the petitioner to move an application before respondent no. 4 i.e. Institution from which he had appeared in the Class-X examination for correction of the name of his father along with the necessary supporting documents as well as the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Jigya Yadav (supra). The Institution after verifying the documents shall forward the same to the Board within 15 days on receipt of the application. Thereafter, the Board shall pass necessary orders in the light of the directions issued by the Apex Court in case of Jigya Yadav (supra).

Writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 24.8.2021

V.S.Singh