Telangana High Court

Ashok Kumar vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 17 October, 2022

Bench: G.Radha Rani

         THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

                WRIT PETITION No.34327 OF 2011

ORDER:

This petition is filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of

mandamus declaring the proceedings L.Dis.No.167/H1/2010 dated

11-04-2011 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and

contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently to direct

the respondent to correct and alter the date of birth of the petitioner

from 31-09-1985 to 29-09-1986 in the Secondary School Certificate

bearing No.AA418848 dated 30-04-2002 of the petitioner or to 30-09-

1985 or any other date existing in the calendar

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Government Pleader for School Education.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner passed the S.S.C Examination held in the month of March

2002 and was issued with Secondary School Certificate by the

Respondent No. 4 and 5. The Petitioner completed his graduation in the

year 2008. In the month of 2009, while applying for B.Ed, for the first

time the petitioner noticed that his date of birth was mistakenly Dr.GRR,J

recorded as 31-09-1985 in the S.S.C certificate. On verification the

petitioner found that his original date of birth was 29-09-1986 and the

same was mentioned in admission register maintained by Smt. Chenna

Basamma Patil Memorial Government Middle School, Basweshwara

Nagar, Gokul Road, Hubli, where he studied 1st and 2nd class during the

academic years 1992-93 and 1993-94 respectively. However, a mistake

had crept at the time of admission in Mandal Parishad Primary School,

Krishna when he was admitted to 3rd class in the academic year 1994-95

and the same was continued at the time of admission in the 6th class in

the academic year 1997-98 in the Zilla Parishad High School, Krishna

(Kannada Medium) Mahabubnagar District. On noticing the mistake in

recording of the date of birth in his S.S.C certificate, the petitioner

submitted an application to the respondent No.3 through the respondent

Nos.5 and 6 on 01-10-2010 with a request to rectify the mistake while

recording his date of birth as 31-09-1985, since it was a non-existing

date and there could not be 31 days in the month of September.

The learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that the

respondent No.3 without taking into consideration of the error apparent

on the face of record, by his proceedings vide letter dated Dr.GRR,J

L.Dis.No.167/H1/2010 dated 11-04-2011 rejected the proposal

submitted by the 5th respondent on the ground that the period prescribed

for rectification was only 3 years from the date of completion of the

said course and that the said period had lapsed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that

either due to the mistake committed by the school authorities or by the

parents or uncles of the petitioner, the date of birth of the petitioner was

recorded as 31-09-1985 due to which the petitioner could not be

penalized as he would be deprived of his academic career and

employment opportunities as he could not utilize the S.S.C certificate

for any of the said purposes and on the other hand there was every

possibility of rejection of his application since the date of birth recorded

in his S.S.C certificate was a non-existing date in the calendar. He

submitted that the 3rd Respondent ought to have seen that there could

not be 31 days in the month of September and that unless the said

mistake was rectified, the petitioner would be put to great hardship and

would suffer irreparable injury and hence prayed to allow the Writ

Petition.

Dr.GRR,J

6. The learned Government Pleader for School Education submitted

that the petitioner completed graduation with date of birth as 31-09-

1985. It was alleged that the petitioner approached the Head Master of

the school on 01-10-2010 with a request to rectify the correction of date

of birth. The Head Master of the school submitted that the mistake was

continued and recorded basing on the record sheet of CP School,

Krishna of Maganoor Mandal on the strength of which the petitioner

was admitted to VI class and hence as per the entire record of the

school, the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 31-09-1985

and there was no mistake in the records of the school from VI class

onwards. The petitioner submitted application to the respondent No.3

after a period of 9 years and the said proposal was returned by the 3rd

respondent as he was not empowered to entertain any correction after a

period of 3 years from the date of completion of said course, as per

G.O. Ms. No.430, Education dated 31.12.1992

7. He further submitted that the petitioner was at fault in submitting

representation without any basis and after a belated time of 9 years, the

prayer of petitioner was not feasible at this juncture of time and prayed

to dismiss the petition.

Dr.GRR,J

8. Perused the record. The record would disclose that the date of

birth of the petitioner was recorded as 31-09-1985 in the SSC certificate

which was a non-existing date. Since there cannot be 31 days in the

month of September, the petitioner made an application to the

Respondent No.3 through Respondent No.5 and 6 on 1-10-2010 to

rectify the mistake.

9. The respondent No.3 rejected the proposal on the ground that the

period prescribed for rectification was 3 years from the date of

completion of the said course and the said period lapsed.

10. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of

High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Gogineni Gnana Jyothi v. The State

of Andhra Pradesh1 wherein considering all the GO's on the said

aspect it was held that:

"At the request of this court, learned Government Pleader has also produced set of various G.Os on the subject beginning with G.O.Ms.No.1263 Education Department dated 06.05.1961, where the procedure for seeking correction of date of birth in a completed Secondary School Certificate was set out. However, the said procedure relates to a case where date of birth is sought to be corrected on the basis of birth register and where an erroneous date of birth is recorded in the educational records including the SSC Certificate. Under the aforesaid G.O., a time limit of two years was prescribed within which ordinarily a claim would be entertained as per clause 6 of the said G.O. The said G.O.

2015 (3) ALD 530 Dr.GRR,J

underwent an amendment under G.O.Ms.No.898 Education (E) Department dated 29.06.1977 clarifying that such applications would ordinarily be entertained only within two years from the date of completion of the course. The said G.O. underwent further amendment under G.O.Ms.No.77 Education (E.E.I) Department dated 23.02.1988 where the Government delegated its power for correction to the Director of School Education and the District Educational Officer for speedy finalization of cases and they were empowered to correct the date whenever court judgments or decrees are involved and on the basis of the report of the Collector, where recommendations were made on the basis of unimpeachable evidence. Thereafter, another G.O., was issued, being G.O.Ms.No.170 Education (SE) Department dated 30.04.1991, where the Director of School Education was empowered to take effect to the corrections in respect of date of birth in a Completed Secondary School Leaving Certificate, Higher Secondary Certificate, or Higher Secondary (Multipurpose) Certificate. Lastly, the said G.O. was further amended by G.O.Ms.No.430 (Education EE.1.) Department dated 31.12.1992, which provides that no application for such correction/alteration of date of birth in the said completed certificates shall be entertained after a period of three years from the date of completion of the said course. It is on the basis of the last of the G.Os, referred to above, that the impugned order came to be passed."

and further held that:

"The facts of the present case, in my view, stand on a different footing inasmuch as a mistake appears to have occurred at the SSC Board, as the petitioners school certificates throughout mentions the correct date of birth. The said mistake, which occurred in the SSC Board, is apparently a clerical or typographical mistake and when the said mistake is brought to the notice of the competent authority, it ought to have corrected the said mistake itself, inasmuch as the petitioner would be shown older by two years if the date as per the SSC Certificate is to be accepted. The date of birth of the petitioner from primary level to class X, having been correctly recorded, mere recording of erroneous date by the SSC Board in its record obviously cannot put the petitioner to a serious prejudice. The judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.No.1021 of 2010, referred to above, distinguished G.O.Ms.No.430, dated 31.12.1992 as the said mistake cannot be attributed to the petitioner. The parameters under the said G.O.Ms.No.430 dated 31.12.1992, therefore, are Dr.GRR,J

not attracted as held by the Division Bench. In my view, therefore, the aforesaid decision is clearly applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case and as such, is required to be followed in this case also."

11. He also relied upon the judgment of a Division Bench of the High

Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.1021 of 2010 where in it

was held that:

"On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and on perusing the material available on record, as already observed by the learned Single Judge, the present case stands totally on a different footing from the parameters as laid down in the aforementioned G.O.Ms.No. 430, dated 31.12.1992, which contemplates period of three years from the date of completion of SSC, for carrying out any corrections in the school records, whereas in the present case, admittedly, the respondent's correct date of birth was entered in the school records up to 5th standard and it is only after 6th standard the mistake purported to have been occurred. Hence, we do not find any merits in the appeal."

12. The learned Government Pleader for School Education on the

other hand, relied upon judgment of the High Court in the State of

Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No. 34969 of 2016

between Ch. Chinnakishore Venukoti v. State of Telangana2 wherein

the request of the petitioner for correction of his date of birth in the

educational certificate issued by the competent authority to be corrected

after a period of 19 years is considered and rejected.

WP No.34969 of 2016 dated 20.03.2017 Dr.GRR,J

13. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Chief Medical Officer v. Khadeer

Khadri3 held that the request for change of date of birth can be

considered only if it is filed within the statutory period.

14. But, as seen from the facts of the case, the date of birth of the