Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jainab Moyal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 23 August, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023:RJ-JD:26662]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11024/2023
Jainab Moyal, Aged About 30 Years, 17-Aa, Shanti Nagar,
Jhotwara, Jaipur (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Education, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
2. The Director, Rajasthan Board Of Secondary Education,
Ajmer.
3. Sanskar Senior Secondary School, Through Its Principal
Godara Bhawan, Station Road, Ladnun, District Nagaur
(Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hitendra Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rakesh Arora
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
23/08/2023
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the order
passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Anil Ahari Vs.
Board of Secondary (S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.12812/2022) decided on 19.12.2022. The order dated
19.12.2022 reads as under :-
"This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
aggrieved against the order dated 10.02.2022 (Annex.-
7), whereby the application made by the petitioner
seeking correction in the date of birth in the mark-sheet
of secondary, has been rejected by the respondent-
Board.
The application has been rejected on account of the
fact that more than 5 years have passed since the
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 04:49:28 AM)
[2023:RJ-JD:26662] (2 of 3) [CW-11024/2023]
issuance of the mark-sheet and, therefore, objection in
this regard, cannot be accepted.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in a
similar nature writ petition being Shourya Dadhich v.
Board of Secondary Education & Anr.: SBCW No.
432/2020, decided on 27.01.2020 by bench at Jaipur,
after referring to an order in Arpit Agarwal v. Central
Board of Secondary Education & Ors.: SBCW No.
4362/2017, the Court has ordered for change in the date
of birth on payment of cost and, therefore, the petitioner
may be accorded similar relief.
Learned counsel for the respondents reiterated the
submissions as were made in the case of Shourya
Dadhich (supra), however, it is not denied that the issue
as raised is covered by the order in the case of Shourya
Dadhich (supra).
In the case of Shourya Dadhich (supra), a
coordinate Bench of this Court, inter alia, after referring
to order in Arpit Agarwal (supra) came to the following
conclusion:-
"4. After considering the submissions
made by counsel for the parties and also the
judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this
court in the matter of Arpit Agarwal (supra), in
my view the petition filed by the petitioner
deserves to be allowed for the reasons; firstly,
in the Aadhar Card, Birth Certificate, Passport
and Driving Licence, the date of birth of the
petitioner has been recorded as 27.05.1997;
secondly, no prejudice would be caused to the
respondents while changing the date of birth in
the school record and mark-sheet of the
petitioner.
5. In that view of the matter, the writ
petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and
the petitioner is directed to submit an
application in the office of respondents for
change/correction in his date of birth along
with required documents and a certified copy of
this order. On his doing so, the respondents
are directed to make necessary correction i.e.
change in date of birth of the petitioner
in the school record and Certificate of Class
10th, from 27.05.1999 to 27.05.1997 within a
period of one month.
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 04:49:28 AM)
[2023:RJ-JD:26662] (3 of 3) [CW-11024/2023]
6. The petitioner is directed to deposit a
cost of Rs.5,000/- in the office of the
respondents along with the application form."
In view of the submissions made, the petition filed
by the petitioner is allowed in light of and with the similar
directions as given in the case of Shourya Dadhich
(supra). "
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a limited
submission that the respondents may be directed to consider and
decide the representation of the petitioner, while keeping into
consideration the order passed by this Court in Anil Ahari (supra).
3. In light of such submission, the present writ petition is
disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the
representation of the petitioner, while keeping into consideration
the order passed by this Court in Anil Ahari (supra), by passing a
speaking order, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt
of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law.
4. All pending applications also stands disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
209-Sudheer/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
