Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT CHANDRACHUD, C.J. AND DILIP GUPTA, J.
ANAND SINGH ....Appellant
Versus
U.P. BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Special Appeal No. 160 of 2014, decided on 11th February, 2014)
Result; Special Appeal Allowed.
Certainly. Here are the key points from the legal document provided:
The case involves a challenge to the rejection of an application for correction of the mother’s name in the academic certificates issued by the Board, based on the delay beyond the prescribed time limit (!) (!) .
The relevant regulation (Regulation 7) prescribes a three-year time limit for submitting applications for correction of entries in the certificates, except for spelling mistakes, which are subject to a different, more lenient proviso (!) (!) (!) .
The regulation distinguishes between corrections for clerical errors or omissions and corrections for spelling mistakes. Corrections related to clerical errors must be made within three years, but spelling mistakes in names can be corrected without such a time limit, provided the application is justified and bona fide (!) (!) .
The correction of the mother’s name, which was a spelling mistake, should not be strictly barred due to delay, especially when the Board itself has recognized no time limit for correcting spelling errors in names under the proviso (!) (!) .
The particulars in the certificate that are critical for admission or employment—such as date of birth, subjects, examination year, and division—are subject to the three-year correction limit. However, details like the name of the candidate or parents are less critical and should not be restricted by this time limit when requesting corrections based on spelling mistakes (!) .
The Court held that the rejection of the application solely on the grounds of delay was unsustainable, and directed the Board to reconsider the application, taking into account all relevant evidence and records, and to pass a fresh order within four months (!) .
The Court clarified that its interpretation applies only to corrections involving the name of the candidate or their parents, not other particulars that impact legal rights or eligibility (!) .
The appeal was allowed to the extent of these directions, and the previous order rejecting the correction due to delay was set aside (!) .
Would you like a more detailed analysis or specific legal advice based on these points?
By the Court.—This special appeal arises from a judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 8 January 2014.
The appellant, in the writ proceedings sought to question the legality of an order dated 11 October 2013 passed by the first respondent rejecting his application for correction of the name of his mother in the certificate issued by the U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate Education (hereinafter referred to as the Board) on the ground that it was submitted beyond the prescribed period of three years. The appellant passed the High School examination conducted by the Board in 2006 from the Saraswati Vidya Mandir Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Deviganj, District Fatehpur. Prior thereto, the appellant completed his Junior High School studies from Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Kirtikheda, District Fatehpur. According to the appellant, the name of his mother was recorded as Munni Devi in the record of the aforesaid Institution. It is stated that when the appellant took admission for High School studies, the name of his mother was recorded as Munni Devi in the scholar register and also in the Transfer Certificate issued by the Saraswati Vidya Mandir Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya. However, it is his case that due to a bona fide mistake committed by him, the name of his mother was mentioned as Lata Devi when he obtained registration in the High School Examination 2006. The mistake continued at the time of registration in the Intermediate Examination-2008. On 26 October 2010, the father of the appellant submitted an application to the Secretary of the Board through the Principal of the Saraswati Vidya Mandir Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya for correcting the name of the mother of the appellant in the High School and Intermediate certificates from Lata Devi to Munni Devi. Copy of this application indicates that an endorsement was made by the Principal of the Institution on 29 October 2010 that the correct name of the mother of the appellant is Munni Devi and so the necessary corrections may be made in the certificates. On 3 September 2012, an application was again submitted before the Secretary of the Board for correcting the name of the mother of the appellant. Since the application was not disposed of, the appellant filed a writ petition, which resulted in an order dated 1 August 2013, directing the authority concerned to take an expeditious decision in the matter. Eventually, the application was rejected by the order dated 11 October 2013 on the ground that it was filed beyond the prescribed period of three years prescribed in the Regulations.
2. The Regulations, which have been framed in pursuance of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, contain Regulation 7 for correction of the details bearing in the High School and Intermediate certificates. The said Regulation 7 as amended on 20 September 2013 provides as follows :
^^fofu;e&7
lfpo ifj"kn dh vksj ls lQy mEehnokjksa dks ifj"kn dh ijh{kk esa mRrh.kZ gksus dk izek.k i= fofgr izi= esa nsxk vkSj ckn esa mldh izfof"V;ksa esa dksbZ 'kqf} djsxk] c'krsZ fd izek.k i= esa fdlh ,slh xyr izfof"V fdlh vfopkfjr fyfidh; Hkwy ;k yksi ds dkj.k ;k fdlh ,slh fyfidh; Hkwy ds dkj.k dh x;h gks] tks vlkoèkkuh ls ifj"kn ds Lrj ds ;k ml laLFkk ds] tgka ls vfUre ckj f'k{kk izkIr dh gks] Lrj ij vfHkys[k esa gks x;h gksA ;g 'kqf} lfpo }kjk mlh fLFkfr esa dh tk ldsxh tcfd vH;FkhZ us lacaf/kr ijh{kk ds izek.k i= dks ifj"kn }kjk fuxZeu dh frfFk ls rhu o"kZ ds vUnj gh fyfidh; =qfV dh vksj /;ku vkd`"V djrs gq, lacaf/kr iz/kkukpk;Z@vxzlkj.k vfèkdkjh dks =qfV ds la'kks/ku gsrq izkFkZuk i= izLrqr dj fn;k gks vkSj mldh izfr iathd`r Mkd ls lfpo ifj"kn dks Hkh izsf"kr dh gksA
izfrca/k ;g gS fd vH;FkhZ ds vad i= rFkk izek.k i= esa vH;FkhZ ds uke firk ds uke vFkok ekrk dk uke esa ;fn dksbZ orZuh =qfV gS rks vH;fFkZ;ksa }kjk ;Fkkle; vkosnu djus ij mls ifj"kn ds lacaf/kr {ks=h; dk;kZy; ds {ks=h; lfpoksa }kjk izekf.kr lk{;ksa ds vk/kkj ij rRdky 'kq} dj fn;k tk;sxkA**
3. The English translation of the afores
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
