ORDER

1. Petitioner pursuing his under graduation study is before this Court seeking indulgence in the matter of factual correction of name of his mother in his marksheets of Class-10th & Class-12th passed by him in the year 2016 & 2018 respectively. According to him, his mother's name recorded is "Gayatri Gupta"; whereas, her official name is Archana Gupta. Petitioner had applied for correction in that behalf. However, the same has been rejected by the impugned order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P/1) on the ground that in the obtaining facts and circumstances, name of the petitioner's mother may be corrected/changed as Archana Gupta in place of Gayatri Gupta. in terms of Clause 69.1(i) of the Central Board of Secondary Education Regulations (For brevity 'the Regulations') dealing with change in candidate's name, mother's name and father's name.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner while taking exception to the impugned order submits that the authorities did not appreciate the scope of Clause 69.1(i) of the Regulations in right earnest. Referring to document on record, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the mark-sheets of Class 10th and 12th of petitioner's mother issued in 1992 & 1994 respectively do suggest that her name is Archana Gupta. That apart, her Adhar Card as well as the family Ration Card also bear her name as Archana Gupta. Indeed, in the birth certificate of the petitioner, the name of his mother shown as Gayatri Gupta and his date of birth shown as 5.11.2000 but the same has also been corrected on 30.9.2020. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that mother of petitioner was popularly known as Gayatri Gupta in the house; therefore, due to inadvertence, the name of petitioner's mother was written in the admission form and in the school register as Gayatri Gupta. That apart, the correction of her name as Archana Gupta in place of Gayatri Gupta has also been notified in Madhya Pradesh Gazette Notification dated 25.9.2020. Under such circumstances, the genuineness of the name of the petitioner's mother as "Archana Gupta" cannot be doubted. The substitution of her name as Archana Gupta, in no way, either would cause any prejudice to respondents or would be detrimental to the procedure prescribed under Clause 69.1 of the Regulations. Clause 69.1 of the Regulations suggests that correction on factual typographical error in the mother's name can be corrected if it is consistent with the school record. The school record of Class 6th to 8th suggests the name of petitioner's mother as Archana Gupta. The authorities have fallen in error while holding that petitioner's claim failed in light of Clause 69.1(i) of the Regulations. It is further submitted that the petitioner passed examination of Class 10th in 2016 and Class 12th in 2018 and the application for correction was made well within five years as prescribed under Clause 69.1 of the Regulations itself. Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid relevant documents, the name of the petitioner's mother as Archana Gupta need to be substituted for Gayatri Gupta in the mark-sheets of Class 10th and 12th of the petitioner. He further submitted that in similar facts and circumstances, this Court has acceded to the prayer of the petitioners therein ordering for correction to be carried out by the CBSE Board in the matter of Amaan Alam & Another Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education & Others in (W.P.No.18141/2021 decided on 14.3.2023).

3. Per contra, Shri.D.P.Singh, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2/CBSE Board submits that no exception can be taken to the impugned order dated 26.10.2020 (Annexure P/1) in the matter of correction of mother's name. As even, in birth certificate of the petitioner issued in 2001, the birth register indicates that his mother's name was recorded as Gayatri Gupta and in the school record of Class 10th & 12th of the petitioner, her mother's name is also recorded as Gayatri Gupta. Therefore, no correction is warranted.

4. Shri Amit Laho