IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT AT GUWAHATI
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Smti. Anju Rani Baishya Das, W/o. Sri Ranjeet Kumar Das - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam, Represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, Dispur & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 5826 of 2022
Decided On : 22-10-2024
(A) Constitution of India - Article 14, 16, and 21 - Correction of date of birth in academic testimonials - Petitioner sought correction of age from 17 years 2 months to 16 years as on 01.03.1982 based on school records - SEBA's refusal to correct age upheld due to lack of supporting documents and procedural compliance. (Paras 3, 4, 19, 25, 32)
(B) Administrative Law - Principles of natural justice - Respondent provided reasonable opportunity to petitioner to substantiate her claim for correction of age, which was not availed. (Paras 26, 29)
(C) Education Law - Regulations governing correction of date of birth - SEBA's regulations stipulate strict compliance for alterations, which were not met by the petitioner. (Paras 15, 18)
JUDGMENT :
Robin Phukan, J.
Heard Mr. J. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Saikia, learned Government Advocate for the respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Standing counsel for the respondent No. 2, SEBA and Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, Smti. Anju Rani Baishya Das has prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to correct her age in her High School Leaving Certificate (HSLC) pass certificate No. 8937 of 1982 with Roll F-39, No. 236 as 16 years as on 01.03.1982, instead of 17 years 2 months 21 days, as reflected in the said certificate with reference to the office communication dated 26.05.1984 and the letter, dated 16.12.2020, issued by the office of the Headmaster of Pub-Bahjani Gopalthan Balika Vidya Mandir, Nalbari. Alternatively, it is also prayed for recalling the order dated 04.04.2022, passed by the Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Assam ("SEBA", for short) and to consider the prayer of the petitioner for correction of her date of birth in academic testimonials issued by the SEBA, in accordance with reference to the communication dated 26.05.1984 and the letter dated 16.12.2020.
3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under:
Thereafter, the petitioner again approached the SEBA on 05.12.2019, by submitting a representation with a prayer for correction of her date of birth with reference to the letter dated 26.05.1984 of the Headmaster of Pub-Bahjani Gopalthan Balika Vidya Mandir. But, the said representation had failed to evoke any response from the Secretary, SEBA. Thereafter, the petitioner had submitted a representation before the Headmaster of Pub-Bahjani Gopalthan Balika Vidya Mandir on 05.11.2020, for authentication of the letter, dated 26.05.1984, and the present Headmaster of the said school, vide letter dated 16.12.2020, authenticated the same, and thereafter she had submitted the same to the Secretary, SEBA. However, no action was taken upon the same by the Secretary, SEBA.
Thereafter, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing a writ petition, being WP(C) No. 3698/2020, and the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by directing the Secretary, SEBA to pass a reasoned order on the representation dated 05.12.2019, submitted by the petitioner and it was also observed that the petitioner would submit a fresh representation before the SEBA for adjudication of the matter and accordingly, the petitioner had submitted a fresh representation to the Secretary, SEBA on 15.11.2021. But, without considering the actual facts and without going through the office communication dated 26.05.1984 and 16.12.2020, the Secretary, SEBA had disposed of the representation dated 15.11.2021, in illegal and arbitrary manner on 04.04.2022.”
4. Being agg
Board of Secondary Education Assam (SEBA) vs. Md. Sarifuz Zaman & Ors. reported in (2003) 12 SCC 408
Bharat Cooking Coal Ltd. 7 Ors. Vs. Shyam Kishor Singh reported in AIR 2020 SC 940
State of U.P. & Anr. vs. Shiv Narain Upadhya reported in (2005) 6 SCC 49
State of Maharastra & Anr. vs. Gorakhnath Sitaram Kamble & Ors. reported in (2010) 14 SCC 423
Surjeet Singh Sahni vs. State of U.P. reported in (2022) 15 SCC 536
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.
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....
The court established that the three-year limitation period for requesting corrections in certificates issued by the Board is mandatory and must be adhered to, regardless of the circumstances surroun....
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.
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.