The court affirmed the right to change one's religion and name in official records under Rule 3(1) of KER 1959, supported by constitutional protections.

JUDGMENT :

D.K. SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner’s parents belong to different religions. The father of the petitioner is a Muslim and the mother of the petitioner is a Hindu. Though the petitioner was born in Palani, Tamil Nadu, but he was brought up in Kerala at Kodunthirapully in Palakkad District. The petitioner completed his Secondary Education at Grace Higher Secondary School, Kodunthirapully. However, the school is no longer in existence. At the time of admission in the school, the petitioner’s name was ‘Mohammed Riyazudeen C.S.’ and his religion was mentioned as ‘Islam, Mappila’ .

3. According to the petitioner, when his name was entered as ‘Mohammed Riyazudeen C.S.’, he was minor, and it was the father of the petitioner who entered the particulars of the petitioner, including his name and religion, in the school. After he attained the majority, the petitioner found that he does not believe in Islam and he practices Hindu religion inasmuch as he was brought up by his mother according to the tenets of the Hindu religion. As the petitioner does not believe in Islam and he practices Hindu religion, he wants to change his name from ‘Mohammed Riyazudeen C.S.’ to ‘Sudhin Krishna C.S’ and his religion as Hindu. It is again stated in the petition that the petitioner is married to a Hindu woman.

4. The petitioner has moved an application on 06.06.2024 before the 4^th respondent for effecting the changes in the name and religion of the petitioner, but no action has been taken so far. It is also the case of the petitioner that, the petitioner had officially converted himself even other wise to Hinduism by embarrassing the said religion and in support of the said contention, a copy of the certificate dated 13.11.2021 issued by the Arya Samajam, Calicut, has been produced along with the writ petition as Ext.P3. The petitioner had also made a Gazette notification concerning his change of religion and name on 28.06.2022 as Ext.P4.

5. After filing the application and requisite supporting documents, the petitioner received the impugned communication dated 19.08.2024 stating therein that there exists no provision in KER 1959, to effect the changes in the religion in the School Leaving Certificate.

6. The petitioner, however, submits that the aforesaid stand of the respondents is in clear contravention of Rule 3(1) Chapter VI of the KER, which contemplates change in religion, caste and date of birth of the students entered in the admission register. She further submits that even otherwise, the petitioner’s case is covered by two judgments of this Court in Naveed M.C @ Noufal vs. State of Kerala in W.P.C No. 3832/2021 dated 08.03.2021 and in Lohith S. vs. State of Kerala , in W.P.(C) No.22847/2024, dated 09.07.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore, submits that in view of the provisions of Rule 3(1) Chapter VI of KER as well as the aforesaid two judgments, the impugned communication is to liable to be set aside and the respondents should be directed to correct the name and religion of the petitioner in his SSLC book.

7. On the other hand, Ms.Parvathy Kottol, learned Government Pleader, vehemently submits that the Government has not notified an authority as provided in Rule 3(1) Chapter VI of KER for effecting the changes in caste and religion column. The Commissioner of Examination has been notified vide Government Order dated 30.06.2022, to alter the date of Birt