JUDGMENT :

N.V. Anjaria, J.

The short question which arises for consideration in this petition is whether the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad was justified in not entertaining the application for correction in the date of birth in the school leaving certificate, holding that his court had no jurisdiction for the reason that the person praying for correction of the birth-date was born at Vijapur, District Mehsana.

2. The challenge in this petition is directed against order dated 03.07.2014 passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 6, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No. 510 of 2014 which was filed by the petitioner-father before the said court for correction of date of birth of his daughter.

3. The case was inter alia that the daughter Kinjal was born on 17.11.1990 at Primary Health Care Center, Village/City Vasai Taluka Vijapur District Mehsana. The birth date at that time was recorded in the register of Talati-cum-Mantri, Mehsana, on 28.11.1990. The petitioner has produced copy of the birth certificate issued by the competent authority showing the said birth-date. The daughter of the petitioner studied at Bhavna Girls Higher Secondary School at Ahmedabad-respondent No. 1 herein. Upon completion of secondary education in the said school, the school leaving certificate was issued in which the birth-date was incorrectly recorded as 17.11.1989. The petitioner has produced a copy of school leaving certificate dated 11.12.2012 and the register of respondent No. 1- school being school register G.R. No. 1959, serial No. 2032 recording erroneously the birth-date 17.11.1989.

3.1 The petitioner filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 510 of 2014, and prayed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate's Court at Ahmedabad, for an order for correction of date of birth in the school leaving certificate and for direction against respondent No. 1-school for re-issuance of school leaving certificate duly corrected vice the date of birth. It was stated that his daughter was desirous to go abroad and at the time of seeking passport, the error in recording of birth-date was noticed, therefore the same was required to be corrected.

4. Heard learned advocate Ms. Hiral Mehta for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. A.D. Oza for respondent Nos.2 and 3. None appeared for respondent No. 1-school though served with the rule of this court.

4.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner relied on decision of this court in Nitaben Nareshbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat, 2008 (1) GLR 884. On the other hand, learned advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3 based his contentions on the basis of affidavit-inreply filed by Education Inspector, District Education Office, Ahmedabad(Rural).

5. The subject field of correction of date of birth, name or place of birth in the school leaving certificate, is governed by the Regulations framed under the Gujarat Secondary Education Act, 1974. They are framed in exercise of powers under Section 54 of the Act, in particular Regulation 12 thereof. Regulation 12(5)(i) provides for effecting a change in the name by making an application in the prescribed proforma along with certain documents in Regulation 5(1)(A) to (D). Regulation 12(6) pertains to the correction of date of birth. According to it, during the time when a student has been studying in the school, only the school authorities are competent to effect correction. Afterwards, the Magistrate (First Class) concerned is vested with the jurisdiction to order the correction upon being furnished necessary documents and upon being satisfied about the correction requested for.

6. The rejection of the application of the petitioner on the ground that the Ahmedabad court lacks the jurisdiction, was wholly erroneous in law. Learned Magistrate reasoned that since the birth of the petitioner's daughter was at different place in District Mehsana, the Magisterial court in that district would be the competent court to exercise the jurisdiction.