[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Lakhendra Gosai vs The Bihar School Examination Board on 31 January, 2026
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.287 of 2026
======================================================
Lakhendra Gosai Son of Kailash Gosai, Resident of Village-Sarmaspur, Post
Office-Kalwari, Police Station-Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar School Examination Board through its Chairman, Patna.
2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
4. The Deputy Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nadim Seraj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 31-01-2026
Heard learned Advocate for the respective parties.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking
quashing of the order, as contained in Memo No. DP-789 dated
16.03.2024
, issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary,
Bihar School Examination Board (in short 'Board') whereby the
application of the petitioner dated 06.05.2023 for correction of
his date of birth in matriculation certificate as 20.01.1963, in
place of 20.01.1968, has been rejected.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner's actual date of birth is 20.01.1968 and at the
time of admission of the petitioner in the High School, Shrisiya,
Patna High Court CWJC No.287 of 2026 dt.31-01-2026
Kanti, Muzaffarpur, his parents had submitted correct date of
birth, as afore noted, but mistakenly it has been wrongly entered
in the admission register as 20.01.1963 and due to the wrong
entry made by the school, the same mistake has been occurred
in Matriculation certificate duly issued by the Board in the year
1986. The petitioner has approached time and again before the
Board, but the correction in the Matriculation certificate could
not be done and finally the representation of the petitioner for
necessary correction came to be rejected, being barred on
account of delay, which is under challenge before this Court.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner also placed
reliance a decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Jigya Yadav v. CBSE, reported in (2021) 7 SCC 535
and referring thereto it is submitted that necessary correction in
the date of birth should not be guided by the policy decision of
the Board, rather if there are certain public documents to
support the necessary correction, in such circumstances, the
Board should take lenient view and make the necessary
correction in the matriculation certificate, but the same has not
been done.
5. Learned Advocate for the Board, Mr. Nadim
Seraj, submitted that admittedly the petitioner passed his
Patna High Court CWJC No.287 of 2026 dt.31-01-2026
Matriculation examination in the year 1982 and the
Matriculation certificate was duly issued in favour of the
petitioner long back in the year 1986 and for the first time he
approached before the Secretary of the Board in the year 2023
by filing application for necessary correction after a delay of 37
years. It is submitted that the policy decision of the Board is
very clear on the point that correction in the date of birth shall
not be allowed beyond the period of ten years, hence the
application of the petitioner has rightly been rejected by treating
it as time barred. It is further contended that identical matter has
come up for consideration before a coordinate Bench of this
Court in C.W.J.C. No.9889 of 2022 wherein the Court has
dismissed the writ petition considering the fact that the
candidate has approached this Court after 27 years of passing of
the matriculation examination.
6. This Court has considered the submissions of the
learned Advocate for the respective parties and also took note of
the materials available on record. Admittedly, the petitioner had
passed the matriculation examination in the year 1982 and
certificate was also issued by the Board in the year 1986 itself.
Now the petitioner has approached this Court after 39 years. The
policy decision of the Board is very much clear that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.287 of 2026 dt.31-01-2026
correction in the date of birth shall not be allowed beyond the
period of ten years. Moreover, in identical matter, the coordinate
Bench of this Court referred hereinabove has not interfered
taking note of the delay in approaching this Court for making
correction in the matriculation certificate, after such belated
stage.
7. So far the reliance of the petitioner over the
decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Jigya Yadav (supra) is concerned, the same does not cover the
case of the petitioner, rather the Court emphasized that there is
no reason for the CBSE to turn down such request or attach any
pre-condition, except reasonable period of limitation and
keeping in mind the period for which the CBSE has to maintain
its record under the extent regulation.
8. This Court finds the writ petition is devoid of any
merit. Accordingly, the same stands rejected.
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 04.02.2026
Transmission Date NA
