Sruthy S vs The Central Board Of Secondary ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 46 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 46 Ker
Judgement Date : 4 January, 2021

Kerala High Court

Sruthy S vs The Central Board Of Secondary ... on 4 January, 2021

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

     MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 14TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.20750 OF 2020(P)


PETITIONER:

               SRUTHY S.
               AGED 31 YEARS
               D/O.SUNDARAM, P.K.BHAVANAM, PARIPPALLY P.O., PIN-691
               574, KOLLAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT C/O.SREESUGAN
               R.J.K.KRISHNA BHAVAN, GANAPATHY NAGAR 171,
               THAMARAKULAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 001.

               BY ADV. SRI.P.A.SALIM

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
               REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, REGIONAL OFICE, 1630A, J-BLOCK,
               ANNA NAGAR WEST, CHENNAI-600040

      2        THE PRINCIPAL
               SREENIKETHAN CENTRAL SCHOOL, KARAMCODE P.O.,
               CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM, PIN-691 579

               R1-2 BY SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.20750 OF 2020(P)

                                 2




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 4th day of January 2021

The petitioner passed the tenth examination in the

year 2005 had his CBSE certificate with date of birth shown

as 06.08.1989. According to the petitioner, his actual date

of birth as seen from the birth certificate and the passport

is 06.09.1989. He applied to the CBSE for correction of

the date of birth entered in the CBSE certificate in

concurrence with the date of birth shown in birth certificate

as well as in the passport as 06.09.1989. This application

was rejected by Ext.P5 order which is under challenge in

the present proceedings.

2. The respondent has filed a detailed objection and

opposed the application contending that jurisdiction of the

CBSE authorities in correction of the date by examination

bye-laws is very limited. A comparative chart narrating the

entire aspects is also extracted in the statement. WP(C).No.20750 OF 2020(P)

3. The learned Counsel submitted that though this

Court had on several earlier occasions relied decision of the

Division Bench in Subin Mohammed S Vs. Union of

India and Ors. [2016 (1) KLT 340], which the learned

Counsel for the petitioner also relied, it was contended that

the matter is now pending consideration before the

Supreme Court. It seems that the Division Bench decision

in Subin Mohammed S case supra holds the field as of

now. Having considered the entire facts and the

inconvenience that may be caused to the petitioner and the

agony which may follow, I am inclined to dispose of the

writ petition in terms of the decision in Subin Mohammed

S. case. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with

the following conditions:

a) The CBSE shall correct the entry as it concerns

the date of birth of the petitioner in Exhibits P4 and P5

and other CBSE records with reference to the birth

certificate issued by the statutory authority if the request

is found to be genuine.

b) The genuineness of the birth certificate can be WP(C).No.20750 OF 2020(P)

ascertained from the respective local / statutory authority

/ Head of the institution or such other method, as the

CBSE may deem fit.

c) The CBSE can demand in advance a consolidated

fee, which shall include expenses for processing the

application.

d) The petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.5000/-

(Rupees Five Thousand only) as cost to the CBSE within a

period of one month.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS