SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(All) 1154

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
Pooja Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh and Others - Respondents
Writ - C No. 21402 of 2023
Decided On : 18-07-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Krishnam Pandey, Aman Tiwari.
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Bharat Pratap Singh, Hridai Narain Pandey.

Headnote:

Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 34 - Civil Appeal - Discretion of court as to declaration of status or right - Identical controversy - Held, Once Apex Court in case of (supra) has emphasized upon obtaining a declaration from a civil court with regard to name which a person wants to adopt by choice, Court cannot take a different view and therefore deciding this case on same lines, writ petition is disposed off permitting petitioner to obtain a declaration from civil court with regard to her claim and once such a declaration is obtained, she is at liberty to approach Board with appropriate documents - Ordered Accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Krishnam Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1, Sri H.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3, Sri Bharat Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 and perused the record.

2. The grievance raised by the writ petitioner is that her name be changed from Pooja Devi to Pooja Yadav in Class 10th and 12th Marks-sheet as well as certificate.

3. It is contended that the petitioner now wants to be known by the name of Pooja Yadav in place of Pooja Devi.

4. The writ petition has been opposed by all the respondents and it has been argued that the identical controversy has been dealt with by the Supreme Court in the judgment dated 03.06.2021 passed in Civil Appeal No.3905 of 2011 (Jigya Yadav (Minor) through guardian/father Hari Singh Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education and others), reported in (2021) 7 SCC 535. In fact, learned counsel for both sides have placed reliance upon the same judgment and it has been argued that even if the Apex Court has permitted change of name, different categories have been spelt out in the judgment of Jigya Yadav (supra). Reference to paragraph no.171 has been made, which reads as follows:-

    "171. As regards request for "change" of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE, it presupposes that the particulars intended to be recorded in the CBSE certificate are not consistent with the school records. Such a request could be made in two different situations. The first is on the basis of public documents like Birth Certificate, Aadhaar Card/Election Card, etc. and to incorporate change in the CBSE certificate consistent therewith. The second possibility is when the request for change is due to the acquired name by choice at a later point of time. That change need not be backed by public documents pertaining to the candidate.

(a) Reverting to the first category, as noted earlier, there is a legal presumption in relation to the public documents as envisaged in the 1872 Act. Such public documents, therefore, cannot be ignored by the CBSE. Taking note of those documents, the CBSE may entertain the request for recording change in the certificate issued by it. This, however, need not be unconditional, but subject to certain reasonable conditions to be fulfilled by the applicant as may be prescribed by the CBSE, such as, of furnishing sworn affidavit containing declaration and to indemnify the CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees in lieu of administrative expenses. The CBSE may also insist for issuing Public Notice and publication in the Official Gazette before recording the change in the fresh certificate to be issued by it upon surrender/return of the original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) by the applicant. The fresh certificate may contain disclaimer and caption/annotation against the original entry (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten) indicating the date on which change has been recorded and the basis thereof. In other words, the fresh certificate may retain original particulars while recording the change along with caption/annotation referred to above (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten).

(b) However, in the latter situation where the change is to be effected on the basis of new acquired name without any supporting school record or public document, that request may be entertained upon insisting for prior permission/declaration by a Court of law in that regard and publication in the Official Gazette including surrender/return of original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) issued by CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees. The fresh certificate as in other situations referred to above, retain the original entry (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten) and to insert caption/annotation indicatin

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top