Shreya Gupta vs C B S E & Anr.
2015 Latest Caselaw 7778 Del

$~36
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) 9585/2015
       SHREYA GUPTA                                       ..... Petitioner
                            Through: Ms. Neha Gutpa, Advocate

                            versus

       C B S E & ANR                                     ..... Respondents
                            Through: Ms. Manisha Singh, Mr. Akhil
                            Kulshrestha and Ms. Seema Dolo, Advocates for
                            Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate for R-1

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                    ORDER

% 09.10.2015

1. Issue notice to the respondents

2. Ms. Singh accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1.

3. Ms. Singh says that she does not wish to file a counter affidavit and will argue the matter based on the material available on the record.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent no.1/CBSE has not carried out correction in her class X certificate in so far as there is an error in the manner in which the name of her father is reflected therein.

4.1 According to the petitioner, her father's name reads as Mr. 'Rupesh Kumar Gupta' whereas the class X certificate issued to her records her father's name as : 'Rupesh Gupta'. As per the assertion

made in the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner took admission with respondent no.2 school on 27.03.2009 and sat for Class X examination in 2015. The petitioner passed the class X examination in March 2015.

4.2 It is the petitioner's assertion that the respondent no.2 school upon her representation forwarded her request to CBSE on 22.09.2015.

4.3 It is the petitioner's case that she is covered both under the amended and unamended bye-laws.

5. Ms. Singh says that as per the instructions received by her, the CBSE is not able to locate the request of respondent no.2 school, in their record. In any case, Ms. Singh says that the petitioner could follow up with respondent no.2 school in respect of the same.

6. In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to respondent no.1/CBSE to treat the writ petition as a representation and pass suitable orders qua the grievance articulated in the petition.

6.1 Needless to say, the needful will be done within three weeks. While passing the order, respondent no.1/CBSE will also have regard to the judgment of this court dated 17.09.2015, passed in WP(C) 5323/2015, titled : Kalpana Thakur and Anr. Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J OCTOBER 09, 2015 yg