Delhi High Court
Master Utkarsh Raj Through: His ... vs The Regional Officer (Cbse) And ... on 15 January, 2019
$~43
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 15th January, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 6147/2018
MASTER UTKARSH RAJ THROUGH: HIS MOTHER
& NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. SANGITA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Harkirat Sawhney, Adv.
versus
THE REGIONAL OFFICER (CBSE)
AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. for
R-1
Ms. Rashmi Bansal and
Mr. Abdullah Tanveer, Advs.
for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
% J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The petitioner Utkarsh Raj is a Class XII student of the
Kendriya Vidyalaya, Delhi Cantonment. He has moved this Court, by
means of the present writ petition, with a prayer for issuance of a
direction, to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to
change the name of his mother, as reflected in his Class X Grade Sheet
cum Performance Certificate from "Sangeeta Raj" to "Sangita".
2. In support of his claim, the petitioner submits, in this writ
petition, that the name of his mother, in all statutory documents, such
as the Aadhaar Card and the PAN Card is shown as "Sangita", sans
the "Raj" suffix.
3. Mr. Harkirat Sawhney, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner has drawn my attention to the extant guidelines, of the
CBSE, governing the cases involving changes and corrections in the
names of the candidate or her/his parents. It may be noted that, with
effect from 25th June, 2015, the said Guidelines, as contained in
Clauses "(i) and (ii)" of Bye-law 69.1 of the applicable Bye-laws of
the CBSE, were amended. The pre amendment and post amendment
Bye-laws may, for ready reference be reproduced as under :
Rule Existing Rule Amended Rule
No.
69.1(i) Change in name of Applications regarding
candidate/Father/Mother/Gu changes in name or
ardian once entered in the surname of candidate may
Board's record at any stage be considered provided the
while studying in Class IX, changes have been
X, XI, XII or thereafter, admitted by the Court of
within a period of ten years Law and notified in the
from the date of issue of first Government Gazette before
such document shall be the publication of the result
considered on written of the candidate.
request of the considered,
Candidate (not
minor)/father/mother/guardi
an duly forwarded by the
Head of the Institution
supported by the following
documents:
a) Original copy of two
newspapers (daily
English/Hindi newspaper at
National level & daily
newspaper in a vernacular
language circulated in the
locality), in which the
desired change has been
published.
b) Original Affidavit duly
sworn before the Judicial
Magistrate, First
Class/Metropolitan
Magistrate/Executive
Magistrate/Sub Divisional
Magistrate.
c) Original copy of
Publication in Government
Gazette.
d) Payment of prescribed
fee.
e) True copy of admission
form filled in by the parents
duly updated as per Gazette
Notification of desired
change and duly attested by
the Head of the concerned
institution.
f) True copy of School
Leaving Certificate at the
previous school submitted
by the parent/candidate at
the time of admission and
updated as per Gazette
Notification of desired
change, duly attested by the
Head of the concerned
institution.
g) True copy of the page of
admission and withdrawal
register of the school where
the entry has been made in
respect of candidate showing
updation as per Gazette
Notification of desired
change, duly attested by the
Head of the concerned
institution.
69.1(ii) Correction in name to the Correction in name to the
extent of correction in extent of correction in
spelling errors, factual spelling errors, factual
typographical errors in the typographical errors in the
candidate's name/surname, Candidate's
father's name/mother's name/Surname, Father's
name or guardian's name to name/Mother's name or
make it consistent with what Guardian's name to make it
is given in the school record consistent with what is
or list of candidates (LOC) given in the school record
submitted by the school may list of candidates (LOC)
be made. submitted by the school
may be made.
Application for correction in
name of Application for correction
candidate/father's/mother's/ in name of
guardian's name will be Candidate/father's/mother'
considered only within ten s/guardian's name will be
years of the date of considered only within one
declaration of result year of the date of
provided the application of declaration of result
the candidate is forwarded provided the application of
the candidate is forwarded
by the Head of Institution by the Head of institution
with the following attested with the following attested
documents: documents:
a) True copy of Admission a) True copy of
form(s) filled in by the admission form(s) filled
parents at the time of in by the parents at the
time of admission duly
admission duly attested by
attested by the Head of
the Head of the concerned the concerned
institution. institution.
b) True copy of the
b) True copy of the School School Leaving
Leaving Certificate of the Certificate of the
previous school
previous school submitted
submitted by the parents
by the parents of the of the candidate at the
candidate at the time of time of admission duly
admission duly attested by attested by the Head of
the Head of the concerned the concerned
institution. institution.
c) True copy of the
c) True copy of the portion portion of the page of
of the page of admission and admission and
withdrawal register of
withdrawal register of the
the school where the
school where the entry has entry has been made in
been made in respect of the respect of the candidate,
candidate, duly attested by duly attested by the
the Head of the concerned Head of the concerned
institution. institution.
The Board may effect
necessary corrections after
verification of the Original
records of the school and on
payment of the prescribed
fee.
4. Mr. Sawhney points out that Bye-law 69.1(i) would not apply to
his case, as the amended Bye-law covered only cases of change in
name or surname of the candidates. Bye law 69.1(ii), he submits,
covers cases of correction in the names of the candidate or her/his
parents. Mr. Sawhney seeks to pigeonhole his case within the said
clause.
5. Mr. Sawhney relies, in his support, on the judgment of a
Division Bench of this Court in Arya Kariyatil Chendakera v. Central
Board of Secondary Education., 2018 SCC OnLine Del 8402.
6. Per contra, Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the CBSE,
would seek to contend that clause 69.1(ii) is clearly not applicable, as
the said clause only covers cases where correction is sought in order to
make the changed name "consistent with what is given in the school
record". He submits that, even as per the affidavit filed by the
Respondent No.2 - School in the present case, the school record
reflected the name of the petitioner's mother as "Sangeeta Raj". As
such, Mr. Ashok Kumar, would submit that the change sought by the
petitioner would result in disharmony between the CBSE's marksheet
and the school record of the petitioner, which would be contrary to
Bye-law 69.1(ii).
7. Apropos Bye-law 69.1(i), Mr. Ashok Kumar would seek to
submit that the word "candidates", as used in the said Bye-law, is
necessarily required to be interpreted as including the candidates as
well as their parents.
8. Mr. Ashok Kumar would also seek to rely on a judgment of the
Division Bench of this Court in Mazhar Saleem Chandroth (Minor)
Thr. Saleem Chandroth (Father and Natural Guardian) v. CBSE
2018 SCC OnLine Del 8401.
9. I have considered the rival submissions and applied my mind to
the issue at hand.
10. The submission, of Mr. Sawhney, that the case of his client
cannot be brought within the ambit of Bye-law 69.1(i) is, in my view,
clearly unexceptional. The said Bye-law, as amended with effect from
25th June, 2015, covers only changes in the name or surname of
candidates, and not of their parents. Why, or for what reason, the
CBSE decided, while amending the Bye-law, to do away with cases of
change in the name of the parents of the candidates, is anybody's
guess. Suffice it to state that it is not for this Court to rewrite the Bye-
law, which has been framed by the CBSE, which is not under
challenge before this Court.
11. I find substance, therefore, in the submission of Mr. Sawhney
that Bye-law 69.1(i) cannot be invoked either by his client or by the
CBSE.
12. For that reason, the reliance, by Mr. Ashok Kumar on the
judgment in Mazhar Saleem Chandroth (supra) has to be treated as
misguided, as the said judgment dealt with the case of a change in
name of the candidate, and, therefore, invoked Bye-law 69.1(i).
13. Apropos Bye-law 69.1(ii), undoubtedly, if one were to read the
said Bye-law, it would appear that it can be invoked only in order to
bring the record of the CBSE in line with the school record. At the
same time, sitting singly, I cannot ignore the judgment of the Division
Bench of this Court in Arya Kariyatil Chendakera (supra), which
dealt with the case of change of name of the candidate's parents, and
also notes the fact that the school records recorded the wrong name. A
reading of para 2 of the said judgment clearly reveals that the
contention of the petitioner in that case was that her, and her parents
names were "Arya Kariyatil Chandakera", "Kariyatil Chendakera
Deleep Kumar" and "Kavitha Deleep" whereas the school records
inadvertently noted them as "Arya K C", "K C Dilip" and "Kavitha
Dilip". As such, this case, too, dealt with a situation in which the
corrections/changes sought were contrary to the entries contained in
the school records.
14. Despite the said fact, the Division Bench of this Court has held
that the change of name of the mother of the appellant from "Kavitha
Dilip" to "Kavitha Deleep" and, even more particularly, of her father
from "K C Dilip" to "Kariyatil Chendakera Deleep Kumar" (i.e. with
the addition of the "Kumar" suffix) came within the sphere of Bye-law
69.1(ii) and, on that ground, allowed the claim of the petitioner.
15. In my view, the case of the present petitioner cannot be
distinguished from that of the petitioner in Arya Kariyatil Chendakera
(supra). As in that case, in the present case, too, the change sought is
not in the name of the petitioner [as was the case in Mazhar Saleem
Chandroth (supra)], but in the name of the petitioner's parent. In
Arya Kariyatil Chendakera, the Court brought the case within the
ambit of Bye-law 69.1(ii). Following thereupon, this Court permitted
in the case of the father of the petitioner in that case, (i) expansion of
his initials from "K C" to "Kariyatil Chendakera", (ii) change of the
spelling of his name, from "Dilip" to "Deleep" and (iii) addition of the
suffix "Kumar".
16. In the present case, all that is sought is change of the spelling of
the petitioner's mother from "Sangeeta" to "Sangita" and deletion of
the suffix "Raj". I do not see how the present case can be
distinguished, in any manner, from the case of Arya Kariyatil
Chendakera (supra) which, being a judgment rendered by a Division
Bench of this Court, is squarely binding on me.
17. It is also significant, in this context, to note that the changes
sought are supported by the entries, regarding the name of the
petitioner's mother, as entered in her Aadhaar Card and her PAN
Card, which are statutory documents and are, therefore, entitled to
considerable value, inter alia, by virtue of Section 114 of the Evidence
Act.
18. The petitioner admittedly approached the CBSE, for
change/correction of the name of his mother, within the prescribed
period, as per the Bye-laws, referred to hereinabove.
19. In view thereof, I am of the view that the writ petition is entitled
to succeed. It is accordingly allowed. The CBSE is directed to correct
the name of the petitioner, in her Class X Grade Sheet cum
Performance Certificate from "Sangeeta Raj" to "Sangita" by way of
issuance of a fresh certificate containing the corrected name. The
petitioner would be required, for the said purpose, to deposit the
original certificate, containing the uncorrected name, with the CBSE
which he is directed to do within a period of one week from today.
The requisite corrections be effected by the CBSE within four weeks
thereof.
20. There shall be no order as to costs.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
JANUARY 15, 2019/kr
