Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

K Kamesa Akhilesh Kumar C/O K Phani ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 4161 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 4161 Bom
Judgement Date : 7 July, 2017

Bombay High Court
K Kamesa Akhilesh Kumar C/O K Phani ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 7 July, 2017
Bench: Anoop V. Mohta
                                                                            WP 8254/17  
  
                                               - 1 -


                     
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD               
                                             
 
                           WRIT PETITION NO.8254/2017


                  K Kamesa Akhilesh Kumar,
                  age 19 yrs., occu.education,
                  c/o K.Phani Kumar, age 50 yrs.,
                  occu.service, r/o c/o Duravolves India
                  Pvt.Ltd., Waluj, Aurangabad. 
                                    ...Petitioner..
                         Versus

                          1]        The Union of India,
                                    through the Secretary for Ministry
                                    of Human Resources Development,
                                    New Delhi.

                          2]
                     The Central Board of Secondary
                     Education, Shiksha Kendra, 2,
                     Community Center, Preet Vihar,
                     New Delhi.  Through its Secretary. 
                                          ...Respondents... 
                                                              
                             .....
Shri A.B. Kadethankar, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri   Bhushan   Kulkarni,   Standing   Counsel   for   respondent 
nos.1 & 2.
                                                                   
                             .....
  
                          CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA &
                                   SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ. 
                                  
                          DATE:  07.07.2017


ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Anoop V. Mohta, J.) :




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017                      ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 01:06:52 :::
                                                                       WP 8254/17  
  
                                         - 2 -

1]               Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule made 

returnable forthwith.  The petition is taken up for final 

disposal   with   the   consent   of   learned   counsel   for   the 

parties.

2]               The   petitioner   who   is   resident   of   Aurangabad, 

passed  out his  Senior Secondary School examination  i.e. 

12th  Standard   conducted   by   Central   Board   of   School 

Education (CBSE) - respondent from Alwar in the State of 

Rajasthan as his father was in employment at Alwar.  The 

petitioner's result was declared  on 25.5.2015, but  name 

was incorrectly mentioned on the mark sheet and migration 

certificate as "Mr.Akhilesh" instead of his correct name 

as "K Kamesa Akhilesh Kumar".  The petitioner, therefore, 

requested the authorities to correct the name, but they 

expressed inability to do so because of the certificate 

so referred above.  It was advised to get the certificate 

corrected from the CBSE only.

3]               The   petitioner,   based   upon   the   Rules 

(Examination   Bye-Laws),   has   taken   basic   step   for 

correction of name by getting it published in Government 

official   gazette   within   one   year   of   declaration   of   his 

result.   In view of Clause 69(1), another condition was 




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017                ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 01:06:52 :::
                                                                      WP 8254/17  
  
                                        - 3 -

that the period prescribed for making an application for 

correction   in   name   of   candidates/fathers/mothers   or 

guardians   was   one   year   from   the   date   of   declaration   of 

result.     It   is   necessary   that   application   of   the 

candidate   is   required   to   be   forwarded   by   Head   of 

Institution   with   the   attested   photo   copies   of   school 

record.     The   school   record   of   the   petitioner   reflects 

correct name as  "K Kamesa Akhilesh Kumar".

4]               The   petitioner,   therefore,   initiated   the 

proceedings for correction of his name within one year. 

The   official   gazette   of   Rajasthan   Government,   however, 

was   published   on   2.6.2016.     By   that   time,   one   year   so 

prescribed in the Rules had expired. That resulted into 

delay in taking out application in view of Rule 69 within 

one   year.     The   petitioner,   though   applied   in   the   above 

background,   respondent   -   CBSE,   however,   rejected   the 

application for correction mainly on the ground of delay 

in filing the application within one year from the date 

of declaration of result.

5]               Learned   counsel   appearing   for   the   respondents, 

based upon the instructions, submitted that there is no 

power   and/or   procedure   prescribed   to   condone   the   delay 




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017               ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 01:06:52 :::
                                                                        WP 8254/17  
  
                                          - 4 -

and, therefore, for want of specific Rule, they are not 

empowered to condone the delay.

6]               In   the   present   case,   we   have   noted   that   the 

petitioner   did   take   first   step   immediately   within   one 

year.   There was no fault on the part of the petitioner 

when   the   Government   gazette   was   published   on   2.6.2016. 

The petitioner's school record supports the case of the 

petitioner, as prayed.  In the present case, as there is 

no  power  and/or procedure prescribed for  condonation of 

delay.   For want of correction of the petitioner's name 

in   the   relevant   certificates,   he   would   suffer   at   every 

stage of his further education, even in day-to-day affair 

of life for want of correct description in the name.  We 

have noted that prior to 21.6.2011, a period of 10 years 

was   prescribed   for   candidates   to   apply   for   such 

correction.  Now it is restricted to one year.  Whatever 

may be the  reason for reduction of  this period  from 10 

years   to   one   year,   in   these   peculiar   facts   and 

circumstances, we are of the view that the case is made 

out by the petitioner for condonation of delay in taking 

out   such   application   for   correction.   The   petitioner 

should   not   be   compelled   to   suffer   because   of   delay   in 




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017                 ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 01:06:52 :::
                                                                        WP 8254/17  
  
                                          - 5 -

publication of Government gazette so recorded above.  The 

averments so made in the petition are additional factors, 

which   in   our   view,   are   required   to   be   considered,   as 

sufficient case is made out to condone the delay.  No one 

can   be   rendered   remedy-less   when   it   comes   to   his 

fundamental, as well as, legal right of education.

7]               The opposition by learned counsel appearing for 

CBSE   about   non-joinder   of   educational   institution   as 

party to the petition and/or the petition as filed being 

premature and/or principle of estoppel, in our view, are 

unacceptable.  The petitioner has made out a case and in 

the interest of justice, as there is no remedy available 

to   the   petitioner,   we   are   inclined   to   allow   the   writ 

petition in following terms.

8]               Submission is also made by the learned counsel 

for the petitioner that all the requisite documents are 

already submitted to the  CBSE including the endorsement 

from the Head of the Institution.

                                    O R D E R

9] Respondent no.2 is directed to correct the

petitioner's name into its record as "K Kamesa Akhilesh

Kumar" and issue corrected Migration Certificate and Mark

WP 8254/17

- 6 -

List pertaining to All India Senior School Certificate

Examination 2015 for Roll No.1618688 and Secondary School

Examination 2013 for Roll No.1121633, pertaining to the

petitioner, within one week from today. However, liberty

is granted to respondents to verify the record, if

required only.

10] Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs.

(SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

ndk/c77175.doc

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter