Back
2017 Supreme(Cal) 550
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
SANJIB BANERJEE, SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, JJ.
Shib Sankar Sahoo - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Others - Respondents
WP No. 3134 3(W) of 2014 (Appellate Side)
Decided On : 28-11-2017
Advocate Appeared:
Partha Sarathi Bhattacharyya, Bharat Ch. Simai, Raju Bhattacharyya, Arunava Maiti, Sumita Shaw
The time limit for correction of date of birth is not rigid or inflexible, allowing for applications to be entertained after the seven-year period under special circumstances.
Headnote:
Time Limit - Correction of Date of Birth - Circular of 1977 - The judgment discusses the interpretation of the circular of October 3, 1977, which sets a time limit of seven years for an application for correction of the date of birth. It emphasizes that the time limit is not rigid or inflexible and allows for applications to be entertained after the seven-year period under special circumstances on the recommendation of the Age Correction Committee of the Board.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking correction of the date of birth recorded in the admit card and pass certificate issued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. The Board relied on a previous judgment to argue that no correction could be effected after a particular point of time.
Finding of the Court:
The court interpreted the circular of 1977 and emphasized that the time limit for correction of date of birth is not rigid or inflexible, allowing for applications to be entertained after the seven-year period under special circumstances.
Issues: Interpretation of the time limit for correction of date of birth under the circular of 1977.
Ratio Decidendi: The time limit of seven years for correction of date of birth is not rigid or inflexible, and applications can be entertained after the seven-year period under special circumstances.
Final Decision: The reference is answered, and the writ petition is to be placed before the appropriate single Bench for expeditious disposal in accordance with the law.
The reference has arisen on the following question as formulated by a single Bench in the order of December 8, 2014:
“I. whether the time limit of 7 (seven) years to apply for correction of date of birth is rigid and inflexible, or is the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education empowered to effect such correction at any time on the application of an aggrieved party, provided exceptional circumstances are shown by the relevant authority and that the case is fit to be entertained?”
2. The question arose in connection with a writ petition filed upon the failure or refusal by the respondent authorities to correct the date of birth recorded in the admit card and pass certificate issued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (the Board) to the petitioner. It is recorded in the order dated December 8, 2014 that the “petitioner had applied before the Board several times for effecting correction of his date of birth … but since no response had been received, this writ petition has been presented on November 25, 2014 seeking, inter alia, order on the Board to correct his date of birth …”
3. In course of the hearing on December 8, 2014, the Board relied on an unreported decision of a single Bench rendered on September 6, 2010 in WP 18467(W) of 2010 (Miss Krishna Basu @ Bose v. The State of West Bengal). Such judgment was cited for the proposition that after a particular point of time no correction could be effected and, as such, no mandamus could be issued in respect thereof.
4. The order of December 8, 2014 noticed the judgment in Krishna Basu and set out considerable portions thereof before interpreting the dictum in Krishna Basu to be that after a particular period of time, the date of birth of a candidate as recorded in the admit card or the certificate issued by the Board could not be corrected at all. It was observed in the order of December 8, 2014 that the decision in Krishna Basu “appears to have overlooked the next part of the guidelines empowering the administrative head to direct the relevant committee to correct errors at any time, subject to exceptional circumstances being set up and the case being one fit for being entertained.”
5. Thus, since the dictum in Krishna Basu was read and understood to be that there was an inflexible period of limitation prescribed in the rules or circulars for receiving an application for correction of the date of birth, the reference was made as the circular of 1977 which would be applicable in the present case contained an express provision for a belated application to be received in exceptional circumstances and, in effect, there being no embargo, so to say, on the time scale.
6. It is necessary in this context to notice three paragraphs from the judgment in Krishna 4 Basu which have also been quoted in the order of reference of December 8, 2014:
“The petitioner took the Higher Secondary Examination held in April 1975. Under the circumstances, the question of correction of her date of birth recorded in the admission register of Salkia Balika Vidyalaya O Shilpashram, the secondary school concerned, was to be decided, if at all, according to the provisions of the circular of the Board dated May 13, 1958.
Under the circular the headmaster of the secondary school or the petitioner’s legal guardian through the headmaster could apply to the Board for necessary correction in the entry of her date of birth in the admission register of the school within seven years from 1975; and if applied, the Board would have incurred an obligation to examine the question of permitting alteration of her date of birth entered in the admission register of the secondary school.
The admitted position is that until 2002 when the petitioner, of her own accord, applied to the Board seeking correction of her date of birth recorded in the pass certificate issued by the Board in 1975, no other person had ever applied to the Board seeking alteration of her date of birth entered in the admission register of the sec
