The court emphasized that in cases of clerical error or manifest injustice, public authorities have discretion to make alterations despite general rules.

Bell, J.

1. This is an application for a mandamus directing the Director of Public Instruction to entertain an application of the applicant dated the 23rd June, 1942, and to cause the alteration of the date of birth of the applicant from 20th December, 1928, which is alleged to be a mistake to 12th November, 1927, in his school leaving certificate register No. 7067. The motion might have been more happily worded but its intention seems plain enough.

2. The applicant is one B. Ramamurthy, minor by his next friend and father, B.S. Chetti. The respondent is the Director of Public instruction, Madras. The father says in his affidavit that the son was born in Trichinopoly on 12th November, 1927. Domestic troubles arose between himself and his wife. The father had to follow his railway employment in a different part of India to that in which the wife and the children went to live. When the time came for the boy to be sent to school, he was admitted to the second form of the Wardlaw High School, Bellary, in or about June, 1937 and for some reason or another, the mother who took him there and gave the required particulars of his name, birth, etc., gave the date of birth as 20th December, 1928. That was done without the knowledge of the father. The student passed through the High School and in due course sat for the Secondary School Leaving Certificate Examination in March, 1942. He was successful but because he appeared from the school books to be under age, the incorrect date of birth appears on his leaving certificate and under the regulations he will not be permitted to enter for his University course for that year so that in effect, because of his mothers misstatement, he may lose a years University education. The father on finding out the facts of this case sought out the Principal of the Wardlaw High School who advised him to approach the Director of Public Instruction. He obtained a certificate from the Registrar, of Births for the Trichinopoly Municipality which shows the date of birth as being 12th November.;, 1927, and applied to the Director of Public Instruction on 23rd June, 1942, for the alteration of the date on the leaving certificate. No reply was received to this application. He wrote a reminder on 2nd September, 1942. The reply came on 10th September, 1942, to this effect: " I regret I am unable to order the alteration of the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. Register of B. Ramamurthy.

3. A further application was sent on 9th October, 1942, wherein the full circumstances of the case were again set out and a certificate from the District Magistrate, Trichinopoly, was enclosed as further proof of the date of birth. The Director replied on 4th November, 1942:

Since there has not been a clerical error the Director of Public Instruction regrets that he is unable to order the alteration in the entry.

4. Further correspondence took place and the Director took shelter under the orders of the Government issued in G.O. No. MS. 954 Edn. dated 23rd June, 1941. He advised the father to appeal to the Government. On 25th November, 1942, an appeal was preferred to which the Government in their memorandum No. 41388 B/42-1 Edn. dated 7th December, 1942, said:

Sri B.S. Chetti is informed that the general rule is that no alteration of the date of birth or other particulars recorded in the S.S.L.G. should be made after the pupil has completed the S.S.L.C. Course and left school.

5. It is a fact that when the father made his application on 23rd June, 1942, the pupil was still at the school. He did not terminate his connection with the school until 29th June, 1942. The Government added:

This rule is based on administrative grounds. The Government regret that they cannot make an exception." second appeal was thereupon preferred by the father. Attached to this were copies of proceedings in various Courts which went still further to establish the date of birth as being 1927. The Government rejected his petition.

6. The father now asks, under Sec