Delhi High Court
Mohd. Anas Malik vs Central Board Of Secondary ... on 10 July, 2018
# 22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 10.07.2018
W.P.(C) 3288/2017 & CM APPL.14326/2017
MOHD. ANAS MALIK ..... Petitioner
versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY
EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhlak Ali, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Amit Bansal and Ms. Seema Dolo, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
JUDGMENT
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
instituted on behalf of the petitioner prays as follows:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to:
Set aside the letter bearing case No.AI-452/16 dated
22.02.2017 issued by respondent No.1 to respondent No.2
refusing the correction of the factual error as well as
typographical error in the name of the petitioner and
correction of spelling error, factual typographical error in the
name of the father of the petitioner in the certificate/
documents of Secondary School Examination/Class X issued
by respondent No.1 to the petitioner.
Direct the respondent No.1 to correct the factual
typographical error in the name of the petitioner as well as
spelling error and factual typographical error in the father's
name of the petitioner in the certificate/ documents of
Secondary School Examination/ class X issued by respondent
No.1, to make it consistent with the record of school of
respondent No.2 school.
Direct the respondent No.1 to prefix the word Mohd. before
the name of petitioner making it Mohd. Anas Malik from
Anas Malik.
Direct the respondent No.1 to correct the spelling error in the
name of father of the petitioner replacing the word J with Z
and consequently making it Sarfaraz from Sarfaraj and further
direct the respondent No.1 to suffix the word Alam after the
name of father of the petitioner making it Sarfaraz Alam from
Sarfaraj.
Pass such order or further orders which this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
case."
2. The facts as are relevant for the adjudication of the present petition are
as follows:-
(a) On 01.04.2016, the petitioner applied to the respondent No.2
school for admission in Class-I, under the name 'Anas Malik,
son of Mr. Sarfaraj'.
(b) On 28.05.2016, the petitioner was declared successful in the
completion of Secondary School Examination (Session 2014-
16).
(c) The petitioner predicated on his assertion that his, as well as, his
father's name was incorrectly recorded in the Class-X
examination certificate issued by the respondent No.1/CBSE,
thereafter approached the respondent No.2 school for correction
of the error.
(d) The respondent No.2 school, unilaterally made modification on
the original admission form qua the petitioner on 14.02.2017.
(e) Predicated on the ex post facto correction carried out by the
school, as aforestated, the petitioner sought correction in the
Class-X certificate, issued to him by the respondent
No.1/CBSE.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that the
documents annexed to the present petition clearly reflect that the petitioner's
name in the school records was mentioned as 'Mohd. Anas Malik' and that of
his father's as 'Sarfaraz Alam'.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2/CBSE
submits that any change in the name/date of birth, recorded in the Class-X
certificate, issued on behalf of respondent No.2/CBSE, has far reaching
implications and cannot be effected without following due process of law.
5. In this behalf, it is asserted on behalf of respondent No.2/CBSE that in
relation to the student's admit card, results and certificates, the same are
issued by the respondent No.2/CBSE, on the information maintained by the
subject school and only spelling and typographical errors may be corrected
on an application in this behalf being made by the concerned student. It is,
therefore, urged that the corrections, as prayed for by the petitioner, cannot
be allowed, except in accordance with law.
6. In the present case, it is observed that the record maintained by the
school, in relation to the petitioner, from the time of the latter's admission,
until the time of the unilateral ex post facto corrections made by the former
in the year 2017, reflect his name as 'Anas Malik' and that of his father as
'Sarfaraj'; and that the procedure provided by law, seeking change of name,
has admittedly not been followed.
7. It is, in this view of the matter, that respondent No.2/CBSE vide
impugned letter/order dated 22.02.2017, disallowed the request for
correction made on behalf of the petitioner. In the absence of a Gazette
Notification preceding a request for change of name, in accordance with
procedure established by law, the respondent No.2/CBSE cannot be faulted
for having declined so to do.
8. In view of the foregoing discussion, the impugned letter/order bearing
case No.AI-452/16 dated 22.02.2017 issued by respondent No.1/CBSE does
not call for any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and the petition, therefore, being devoid of merit is
accordingly dismissed. The pending application also stands disposed of.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
(JUDGE)
JULY 10, 2018
dn
