Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Minakshi Das W/o Kishore Kumar Barman – Petitioner
Versus
The Board of Secondary Education, Assam and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 2568 of 2023
Decided On : 06-05-2024
CORRECTION - Date of Birth - [Regulation 8, SEBA vs. Md. Sarifuz Zaman and Others, (2003) 12 SCC 408] - The court considered the petitioner's request for correction of her date of birth in her HSLC records based on a certificate from the hospital authorities. The court found that the petitioner's application for correction was made after a significant delay of more than 42 years from the date of her HSLC Examination, exceeding the time frame prescribed by the regulations of SEBA. The court also noted discrepancies in the petitioner's requests for correction, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner did not approach the court with clean hands. As a result, the court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner's contentions did not merit acceptance.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a direction for correction of her date of birth in her HSLC records based on a certificate from the hospital authorities, claiming that her actual date of birth was different from the one recorded in her HSLC records. The petitioner's application for correction was made after a significant delay of more than 42 years from the date of her HSLC Examination.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's application for correction was made after a significant delay, and there were discrepancies in the petitioner's requests for correction, indicating that the petitioner did not approach the court with clean hands. As a result, the court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner's contentions did not merit acceptance.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's request for correction of her date of birth in her HSLC records should be accepted, considering the delay in making the application and discrepancies in the petitioner's requests for correction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's application for correction was made after a significant delay, exceeding the time frame prescribed by the regulations of SEBA. The court also found discrepancies in the petitioner's requests for correction, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner did not approach the court with clean hands. As a result, the court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner's contentions did not merit acceptance.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner's contentions did not merit acceptance, and there would be no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Counsel along with Mr. D.K. Roy, learned Standing Counsels for the Board of Secondary Education Assam (SEBA) representing the respondents no. 1, 2 & 3.
2. None has appeared for the respondent no. 4.
3. As consented to by the learned counsels appearing for the parties, the present proceeding is taken up for final consideration and disposal.
4. The petitioner, by way of instituting this writ petition has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities of the SEBA for effecting a correction in her HSLC records pertaining to the date of birth as recorded therein, basing on the application as submitted by her in the matter on 06.12.2022.
5. The petitioner is working as a Senior Assistant in the Office of the Conservator of Forests, Research and Education Circle, Basistha, Assam and had joined her said services on 03.02.1993. The petitioner while joining her services had relied upon her Admit card issued by the SEBA for the HSLC, Examination 1980. In the said Admit card, the petitioner’s age was recorded as 15 years 7 months and 15 days as on 01.03.1980 and accordingly, her date of birth would be 16.07.1964.
6. As projected in the writ petition, after the death of her father on checking his belongings, the petitioner, on 20.05.2020, came to discover a document dated 03.07.1965, issued by the authorities of Ganesh Das Hospital for Women and Children, Shillong, wherein, it has been noted that her mother had given birth to a female child on 24.06.1965 at around 1.45 pm. It is further contended in the petition by the writ petitioner that on discovery of the said document, which she contends to have recorded her birth, the petitioner post Covid-19 Pandemic, approached the Hospital authorities in the year 2022, requesting them to verify the correctness of the details indicated in the said documents dated 03.07.1965. The Hospital authorities on 18.11.2022 issued to the petitioner the certificate confirming that the mother of the petitioner had given birth to a female child on 24.06.1965 at around 1.45 pm as per the birth record maintained in the institution. The petitioner further contends that having received the information of her date of birth to be 24.06.1965 and on receipt of the certificate dated 08.11.2022 from the Hospital authorities, the petitioner on 06.12.2022 approached the Secretary, SEBA, praying for correction of her date of birth as recorded in her HSLC records and for issuance of a fresh certificate by incorporating her now contended to be correct date of birth. The authorities of the SEBA, not having acted upon the said application dated 06.12.2022, the petitioner has instituted the present proceedings praying for an appropriate direction to the respondent authorities for correction of her date of birth as recorded in her HSLC records maintained by the SEBA.
7. Mr. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the certificate dated 08.11.2022 has contended that the same having been so issued from the records maintained by the Hospital authorities and the same having been issued by an authority competent to issue the said certificate, the respondent authorities ought to have taken the same into consideration and corrected the mistake with regard of her date of birth as recorded in her Admit card pertaining to the HSLC Examination, 1980. Mr. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner, for the purpose of explaining the delay occasioning in approaching the authorities of SEBA, in praying for correction of the date of birth of the petitioner, has contended that the fact that the petitioner was born on 24.06.1965 was not to her knowledge and the same came to be discovered by her only pursuant to the death of her father occasioning on 20.05.2020. Mr. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the details of her birth now available in the form of certificate issued by the
The court upheld SEBA's decision to deny correction of the petitioner's date of birth due to non-compliance with procedural requirements and lack of supporting evidence.
The court affirmed that official records of date of birth take precedence over unverified claims, ensuring accuracy in academic testimonials.
Service Law – Retirement - Correction of date of birth - Deprecating any attempt to change date of birth by an employee at the fag-end of his service - Such change or correction is permissible only u....
Date of birth can be corrected in CBSE records based on public documents, given the criteria established in relevant byelaws, without imposing unreasonable limitations on the time for correction.
Point of law: An authority vested with the jurisdiction to issue a certificate and to maintain record of it has inherent power to rectify the mistake, if any, that may occur in the certificate so iss....
In order to maintain writ of mandamus, first and foremost requirement is that petition must not be frivolous, and must be filed in good faith.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
