Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/1160/2024 on 7 May, 2024

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
Sl.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPMS No. 1160 of 2024
                                  Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Mr. Ravi Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Virendra Singh Rawat, Advocate for respondent no. 1.

3. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 2.

4. Petitioner passed High School Examination from Uttarakhand Board of School Education in the year 2022. She was a regular student of Government Inter College, Lohali, District Nainital. According to her, name of her mother has been wrongly recorded as Mamta Negi in the High School Certificate and Marksheet, which deserves to be corrected as 'Pushpa Devi'.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a letter issued by Chief Education Officer, Nainital dated 12.04.2023, in which it is mentioned that name of petitioner's mother is 'Pushpa Devi'.

6. Petitioner made a representation to the Uttarakhand Board of School Education for necessary correction in the certificates, however, her representation was rejected by the Secretary, Uttarakhand Board of School Education, vide order dated 19.03.2024. Petitioner has challenged the said rejection order dated 19.03.2024 in this writ petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the ground taken for rejecting petitioner's request is not sustainable in the eyes of law. He submits that if petitioner's request is not acceded to by the Examination Board, then it will result in serious consequence to the petitioner. He has relied upon a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jigya Yadav v. Central Board of Secondary Education and others, (2021) 7 SCC 535. Certain directions were issued in the said judgment, which are contained in paragraph no. 193 of the judgment.

8. Learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Board of Secondary Education fairly submits that since law declared by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (supra) is the law of the land, therefore, his client will re-consider the request made by petitioner for correction of name of her mother in the educational certificates, as per law, within six weeks from today.

9. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in terms of the statement made by learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 07.05.2024 Navin