(R.V. Ghuge, J.)

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the parties, the petitions are taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2. The petitioners claim to be belonging to “Wani” caste, which falls in Other Backward Classes. The petitioners state that they have taken education from 5th standard till 10th standard from the respondent no.3 Amanvishwa High School, Dhartidhan Society, Garkheda. The school record and especially the Admission Register wrongly maintains the caste of the petitioners as “Lingder” instead of “Wani”. It is further contended that the school leaving certificates issued by the respondent no.3/school bears the entry “Lingder” in the caste column. The petitioners thereafter passed their 11th and 12th standard from the Swami Vivekanand College. However, the school leaving certificates submitted to the College prompted the said college to continue with the same entry “Lingder” relating to the caste of the petitioners.

3. The petitioners further state that since it is wrongly mentioned in their caste column as “Lingder”, the Sub Divisional Officer, Kandhar has issued correct caste certificates to the petitioners on 04/06/2010 containing the entry “Wani-190”, which is recognized as Other Backward Classes Category.

4. The petitioners state that the caste column incorrectly bears the caste entry as “Lingder”, which ought to have been “Wani-OBC”. The petitioners further state that none of their family members including themselves, have availed of any benefits available to the “Lingder” community. Their present caste certificates correctly carry entry as “Wani” and the school record contains the otherwise. Therefore, the petitioners preferred applications supported with an affidavit and annexed their “Wani-OBC” caste certificate, which are submitted to the respondent no.3/school. The said school favourably recommended for effecting the change/correction relating to their caste record and submitted it to the respondent no.2/Zilla Parishad. However, the respondent no.2, without giving any notice and an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, rejected said proposals on the ground that since the petitioners have already left the school, such a correction in the school record is not permissible. It is this order dated 24/09/2012 which is impugned in these petitions.

5. Rule 26.4 of The Secondary Schools Code, 2006 has been interpreted by the Division Bench of this Court in Shaikh Shafi Ahmed Vs. the State of Maharashtra, reported in 2012(5), 2012(5) Mh.L.J. 35 and Vilas S/o.Dattatraya Ransubhe, reported in 2013(1) Mh.L.J.851. In para no.11 of the Shaikh Shafi’s judgment (cited supra), the Division Bench of this Court has observed thus :

"11. For all these reasons, we hold that the instructions contained in para 26.4 of the S. S. Code that an application for change of an entry in the General Register of a school shall be entertained only on behalf of the pupil who is attending the school meaning thereby that it shall not be entertained on behalf of the pupil who has left the school, are directory and not mandatory. In our view, such an application can be entertained even after the pupil has left the school, provided the application is bonafide and the pupil is able to satisfy that the original entry in the General Register of the school is erroneous. The application can be rejected if the entry is not shown to be erroneous and wrong. It, however, cannot be rejected without it being considered on merits, only on the technical ground that the application has been made after the pupil has left the school."

5. Appendix Six of the Secondary Schools Code, 2006 lays down the procedure in respect of making correction and change in names, surnames, caste/sub-caste, date of birth etc., Paragraph Nos.12 to 15 of Appendix Six reads thus :

" Change in Caste or Sub-Caste (in respect of B.C. pupils only):

(12) For making changes in caste or sub-caste of Backward Class pupils the guardian of