JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. Mr. Ashok Kumar, at the very outset, points out that he is nominated Counsel, and not Standing Counsel, for the CBSE.

2. The order passed by this Court on 10 January 2024 shall stand corrected accordingly.

3. The petitioner was a student of the Kendriya Vidyalaya, Gole Market ("KVS" hereinafter).

4. The name of the petitioner's father is Mohd. Sualeheen. This name was correctly reflected in the Class X certificate issued to the petitioner by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE).

5. The petitioner has also placed on record various official documents, including her Aadhar Card, which also reflects the name of her father as Mohd. Sualeheen.

6. The class X Certificate dated 3 June 2017 issued to the petitioner by the CBSE correctly reflected the name of her father as "Mohd. Sualeheen". However, thereafter, there has been an error in the spelling of the name of the petitioner's father in the records of both the CBSE and the KVS. The Migration Certificate dated 30 April 2019, issued by the CBSE, as well as the subsequent Provisional and Character Certificate issued by the KVS, reflected the name of the petitioner's father as "Mohd. Sauleheen", instead of "Mohd. Sualeheen".

7. This error continued to be reflected in the Class XII certificate dated 2 May 2019 issued by the CBSE consequent to the All-India Senior School Certificate Examination 2019 undertaken by the petitioner, In which, too, her father's name is reflected as "Mohd. Sauleheen".

8. The petitioner addressed representations to the KVS and the CBSE, requesting that the name of her father be corrected in the records of the school as well as of the CBSE. As these representations did not elicit any favourable response, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court.

9. Mr. Rajappa, learned Counsel appearing for the KVS, submits that, in the records of the KVS, the name of the petitioner's father has been corrected to "Mohd. Sualeheen" and that the KVS has also communicated to the CBSE on 9 February 2022, requesting the CBSE to effect the said correction in the CBSE certificate as well.

10. The legal position with respect to the right of a candidate to have the name of her father corrected is no longer res integra. The last word on the subject, at least till now, has been spoken by the Supreme Court through the bench of three Hon'ble Judges in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE, (2021) 7 SCC 535.

11. In that case, the CBSE had sought to contend that the right of the appellant Jigya Yadav ("Jigya" hereinafter), to have the name of her parents corrected on the basis of examination bye-laws of the CBSE. The Supreme Court, significantly, identified the issue arising for consideration thus, in para 2 of the judgment:

"2. The seminal issue in these cases is: whether an individual's control over such cardinal element of identity could be denied to him/her by the Central Board of Secondary Education ("CBSE" or "Board", as the case may be) on the specious ground that its Examination Bye-laws of 2007 ("the Bye-laws") must prevail over the claim of the candidate, which are merely intended to regulate such a claim and to delineate the procedure for correction/change in the contents of certificate(s) issued by it including regarding maintenance of its office records?"

12. The Supreme Court was, in Jigya Yadav, dealing with a batch of appeals.

13. Civil Appeal 3905/2011 was the appeal filed by Jigya. The order under challenge in that case had been passed by this Court on 20 December 2010 in WP (C) 3774/2010 (Jigya Yadav v. CBSE, (2010) SCC OnLine Del 4742).

14. Jigya's case was that the names of her parents had been incorrectly recorded in the mark-sheet issued by the CBSE as "Hari Singh Yadav" and "Mamta Yadav" instead of "Hari Singh" and "Mamta". To support her case, Jigya relied on the identity documents of her parents, which had been placed on record.

15. The CBSE rejected Jigya's application for correction of the names of her parents in the marksheets issued by it