Madras High Court
M.Deva vs The Secretary on 4 October, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :04.10.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
M.Deva ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Secretary,
School Education,
Secretariat,
Chennai.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road (DPI Campus)
Nungambakkam, Chennai-6.
3.The Secretary,
Department of Government Examinations,
State Board of School Examination,
College Road (DPI Campus)
Nungambakkam, Chennai-6.
4.The Headmaster/Principal,
SUM Hr.Sec School,
Royappanpatti, Theni District.
5.The Commissioner,
Cumbum Municipality,
Cumbum ... Respondents
Page 1 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the third respondent
herein to alter the petitioner's date of birth as 02.01.1996 instead of
07.05.1994 in my secondary school leaving certificate No.7742937 and in
Higher Secondary Course Certificate No.6621086 as per birth date
registered with the fifth respondent on 03.01.1996 in birth certificate.
For Petitioner :Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen
For Respondents :Mr.P.Thambi Durai
Government Advocate for R1 to R3
:Mr.K.Prabhu for R4
:Mr.K.Hemakarthikeyan for R5
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of
mandamus directing the third respondent to consider the application
submitted by the petitioner on 16.06.2020 and to alter the date of birth as
02.01.1996 instead of 07.05.1994 in the Secondary School Leaving
Certificate and also in the Higher Secondary Course Certificate.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
3. The learned counsel by relying upon the birth certificate issued
by the Commissioner of Cumbum Municipality on 03.01.1996 submitted
that the correct date of birth of the petitioner is 02.01.1996. It was further
contended that the father of the petitioner had given wrong date of birth in
the school as 07.05.1994 and the same was reflected both in the Secondary
School Leaving Certificate and in the Higher Secondary Course Certificate.
Hence, the petitioner has made a representation to the third respondent
seeking for alteration of the date of birth and since the same was not
considered, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
4. The issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely
covered by the earlier orders passed by this Court. Useful reference can be
made to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.24483/2015 dated
14.07.2022 and the relevant portion in the order are extracted hereunder:
“6. The only reason that has been given by the
1st respondent for denying the correction of the Date of
Birth was that the daughter of the petitioner had already
completed her 10th standard and the mark sheet had
already been issued.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
7. This Court had an occasion to deal with the
similar issue wherein such a rejection was made only on
the ground that the concerned student had already left the
institution. The relevant portions in the order in W.P.No.
1433 of 2021 dated 03.08.2021 is extracted hereunder:
?8. The issue involved in the present writ
petition is squarely covered by the earlier order passed by
this Court in W.P.No.14645/2020 dated 29.10.2020. This
Court had relied upon the earlier order passed in W.P.No.
9340/2009 in this regard. The relevant portions in the
order is extracted hereunder:
?7. The relevant portions in the order passed
by this Court in W.P.No.6026 of 2020 dated 10.03.2020 is
extracted hereunder:~
?3.When the matter was taken up for admission,
this Court questioned the learned counsel for the
petitioner as to how the respondents can make such
corrections after the course is completed. In reply to the
same, the learned counsel brought to the notice of this
Court a series of judgments passed by this Court on the
same issue, wherein, this Court had directed the
correction of date of birth. The learned counsel
specifically relied upon the judgment of this Court in
W.P.No.23716 of 2014 dated 03.03.2015. The relevant
portions in the judgment are extracted hereunder:
5.The very same issue came up for
consideration before this Court in W.P.(MD) No.9340 of
2009 dated 18.09.2012. An identical prayer was made to
rectify the date of birth in the petitioner-s service records.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
The respondent Government took a stand that in view of
Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Secondary School Certificate
Rules, the request for correction of date of birth cannot be
considered after the pupil have left the school. This Court
after elaborately considered the Government Orders and
taking note of other decisions on the point, allowed the
Writ Petition and directed the respondent to consider the
birth extracts and other records of the petitioner while
considering his representation and making necessary
changes in the date of birth as in the Secondary Grade
School Leaving Certificate and Higher Secondary Grade
School Leaving Certificate and other certificates. The
petitioner therein was given liberty to make
representation to the respondents along with the copy of
the order. At this stage it would be beneficial to refer to
the operative portion of the order.
?27.The Tamil Nadu Registration of Births and
Deaths Rules, 2000 have come into force with effect from
01.01.2000. Rule 11, deals with the correction or
cancellation of entry in the register of births and deaths
under Section 15 and that the same is extracted
hereunder:
“11.Correction or cancellation of entry in the
register of births and deaths under Section
15:(1)If it is reported to the Registrar that a
clerical or formal error has been made in the register or if
such error is otherwise noticed by him and if the register
is in his possession, the Registrar shall enquire into the
matter and if he is satisfied that any such error has been
made, he shall correct the error (by correcting or
cancelling the entry) as provided in section 15 and shall
in the case of local authorities specified in column (1) of
the Table below, send an extract of the entry showing the
error and how it has been corrected to the officer
specified in column (2) thereof. Local Authorities
(1) Officers
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
(2) Village Panchayat Village Panchayat President Town
Panchayat Executive Officer Cantonment Executive
Officer Municipality Commissioner Corporation
Commissioner Neyveli Lignite Corporation Chief Health
Officer
(2) In the case referred to in sub~rule(1), if the register is
not in his possession, the Registrar shall make a report to
the officer specified in the Table in sub~rule (1) and call
for the relevant register and after enquiring into the
matter, if he is satisfied that such error has been made
make necessary correction.
(3) Any such correction as mentioned in sub rule(2) shall
be countersigned by the officer specified in the Table in
sub~rule (1) in this behalf when the register is received
from the Registrar.
(4) If any person asserts that any entry in the register of
births and deaths is erroneous in substance, the Registrar
may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under
Section 15 upon production by that person a declaration
setting forth the nature of the error and true facts of the
case made by two credible persons having knowledge of
the facts of the case.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub~rules (1)
and (4), the Registrar shall make a report of any
correction of the kind referred to therein giving necessary
details to the officer specified in the Table in sub~rule(1)
(6) If it is proved to the satisfaction of the Registrar that
any entry in the register of births and deaths has been
fraudulently or improperly made, he shall make a report
giving necessary details to the officer authorised by the
Chief Registrar by general or special order in this behalf
under Section 25 and on hearing from him take necessary
action in the matter.
(7) In every case in which an entry is corrected or
cancelled under this rule, intimation thereof should be
sent to the permanent address of the person who has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
given information under section 8 or section 9“.
28. Reading of the statutory provisions makes it
clear that the Act provides for correction or cancellation
of entry in the register of births and deaths. The decision
relied on by the respondents in their counter affidavit
rendered in W.P.No.4244 of 1965, dated 26.10.1965 and
reported in 1966 MLJ 80, is prior to the introduction of
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 and the rules
framed thereunder.
29. Subsidiary Rule 5 of the Secondary School
Leaving Certificate scheme, relied on by the respondents
to contend that the application for alteration in the date of
birth will not be entertained after a pupil had completed
his course or appeared for the S.S.L.C public examination
also is much earlier to the advent of the Registration of
Births and Deaths Act, 1969 and the rules framed
thereunder. Needless to say that the provisions of any
Central Act, will prevail over the State Act or the rules or
regulations, framed by the latter, on the same subject.
When the statutory provisions stated supra, enable the
competent authorities under the Registration of Births and
Deaths Act, 1969, to make correction or cancellation as
the case may be, the contention of the respondents that no
alteration is permissible in the school records, after the
student leaves the secondary education cannot be
countenanced.
30. As stated supra, as per the birth certificate
issued by the Sub Registrar, Thiruvattar enclosed in the
typed set of papers, the name of the child entered in the
said certificate is S.Rajesh Kumar. The date of birth has
been shown as 19.01.1975. When the statute provides for
correction or cancellation of an entry in the register of
births and deaths maintained by the Sub Registrar after
coming into force of the Act, the said certificate can be
relied on for making necessary changes in public records
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
which includes the records maintained in the office of the
Director of Government Examinations, Chennai. The
contention of the respondents that the said correction can
be made only before the student leaves the school and not
later, cannot be accepted for the reason that any entry in
the birth certificate by virtue of registration or alteration
or cancellation by the competent authority under the
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, has to be
given effect to otherwise, the purpose for registration or
alteration or modification would be defeated. There
cannot be different entries in the public records
maintained by different authorities, one under the
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 and the other
by the educational authorities. The date of birth as entered
in the birth extract has to be entered in all the public
records uniformly, unless and until any statutory rules,
restrict such entry, like in the case of a Government
servant, governed by the Tamil Nadu State and
Subordinate Services Rules. In the light of the above
discussion, this Court is not inclined to accept the
objections of the educational authorities made on the
basis of the Subsidiary rules framed before the
introduction of the Central Act,1969.
31. In the light of the decision made in W.P.No.
9800 of 2009, dated 21.10.2009 in R.Deepak Vs.The
Chairman Tamil Nadu Uniform Service Recruitment
Board, Chennai and two others, the certificate issued by
the competent authority under Registration of Births and
Deaths Act, 1969, and other supporting documents relied
on by the present writ petitioner has to be considered.
32. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition
is allowed. There shall be a direction to the respondents to
consider the birth extract and other evidence produced by
the petitioner while considering his representation, dated
03.09.2009 and make necessary changes, in the date of
birth as 19.01.1975 in the Secondary School Leaving
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
Certificate and the Higher Secondary Course and other
certificates. The petitioner is at liberty to make a
representation to the respondents along with a copy of
this order and that he shall produce the original
certificates for making necessary corrections. No costs.
6.The decision referred supra is squarely
applicable to the facts of the case on hand and in the
instant case, the only ground for rejection is that the
petitioner cannot seek for alteration of School Certificates
after he has completed the studies. Since similar issue has
already been decided by this Court, this Writ Petition has
to be necessarily allowed.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing
on behalf of the respondents submitted that Rule 5 of the
Tamil Nadu Secondary School Certificate Rules prohibits
such alteration of date of birth after the candidate leaves
the school and therefore, it will be beyond the jurisdiction
of the respondents to make such corrections in the School
Leaving Certificate.
5. The objections that have been raised by the
learned Government Advocate, have been answered in the
judgment that has been cited supra. Apart from the above
judgment, this Court is taking a very consistent view that,
after coming into the force of the Tamil Nadu Registration
of Births and Deaths Rules, 2000 w.e.f. 01.01.2000, such
corrections can be carried out in the school records when
they are found to be in variance with the birth certificate
issued by the competent authority. ?
8. In view of the above discussion, there shall
be a direction to the second respondent to complete the
preliminary enquiry and submit a report before the first
respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. The first respondent, on
receipt of the report from the second respondent, shall
take necessary action in line with the earlier directions
issued by this Court, within a period of six weeks
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
thereafter.?
9. In view of the above, there shall be a
direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation
to the second respondent along with all the relevant
documents. The second respondent, on receipt of the
same, shall make the necessary changes in the date of
birth as 07.08.1995 in the mark sheet of the Secondary
School Leaving Certificate, Higher Secondary Course
Certificate and the Transfer Certificate. This process shall
be completed by the second respondent within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.?”
5. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the third
respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on
16.06.2020 in line with the birth certificate that was issued to the petitioner
showing date of birth of the petitioner as 02.01.1996 and shall carry out
necessary changes in the Secondary School Leaving Certificate and also
Higher Secondary Course Certificate. The petitioner is directed to make
fresh application to the third respondent in this regard and necessary charges
that are levied shall also be paid by the petitioner. This process shall be
completed by he third respondent within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
6. This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No
costs.
04.10.2023
NCC :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
RR
To
1.The Secretary,
School Education,
Secretariat,
Chennai.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road (DPI Campus)
Nungambakkam, Chennai-6.
3.The Secretary,
Department of Government Examinations,
State Board of School Examination,
College Road (DPI Campus)
Nungambakkam, Chennai-6.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
RR
W.P.(MD)No.9207 of 2020
04.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
