JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15 th day of February, 2021 S. Manikumar, CJ.

Instant writ appeal is filed against the judgment made in W.P.(C)

No.843 of 2020 dated 10.03.2020, by which the writ court disposed of the writ petition by ordering thus:-

“5. I have considered the contention advanced. The petitioner has produced corrected birth certificate and certificates to show the authenticating of her claim. It is submitted that the said documents had been made available with the application for correction as well. In the circumstances, the rejection of the application by Ext.P8 was unjustified.

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 5 th respondent to take up the application submitted by the petitioner for corrections in the CBSE records and to carry out appropriate corrections as evidenced from the corrected birth certificate and the documents produced by the petitioner. The 5 th respondent shall, thereafter, send up the application along with corrected school records to the 4 th respondent. On receipt of the application along with copies of the school records, as corrected, from the 5 th respondent, the 4 th respondent shall take appropriate steps to see that the application is considered, in accordance with law. Orders shall be passed on the application, within six seeks from the date on which the 4 th respondent receives the application from the 5 th respondent.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.”

2. Being aggrieved by the above, Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), represented by the Chairman and Regional Officer, CBSE, Thiruvananthapuram, have preferred this appeal.

3. Shorts facts leading to filing of instant appeal are as under:

“ Instant writ appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge directing the appellants to correct the names of 1 st respondent and her parents in the 1 st respondent's CBSE Certificates without considering the CBSE Bye-laws. The correction of date of birth, name of candidate, father's name, mother's name etc., are governed by the examination bye-laws of CBSE. As per the examination byelaw 69.1(ii), the corrections that could be carried out are only to correct typographical and other errors, to make the certificates consistent with the school records. The appellants contended that the 1 st respondent has, along with the writ petition, produced a birth certificate, issued on 19/12/2019 much after the date when the petitioner had passed her tenth Board Exam. The correction sought by the petitioner does not fit in the category of typographical error as there is considerable change in the names.”

4. Assailing the correctness of the impugned judgment dated

10.03.2020, appellants have raised the following grounds:

“1. As per the examination bye-laws 69.1(ii), the corrections that could be carried out are only to correct typographical and other errors, to make the certificates consistent with the school records.

2. The correction sought by the petitioner does not fit in the category of typographical error as there is considerable change in the names.

3. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Subin Mohammed Vs. Union of India and others (2016 (1) KLT

340), has clearly directed that, the board ought to correct the certificates only if the request is found to be genuine.

4. The name of the mother of the candidate as shown in the school register, were consciously given by the parents and the candidate was given sufficient opportunity to seek correction at least before the Board examination.

5. The 1 st respondent was on the very date of issuance of Exhibit-P1 certificate put to notice as to the entries made in the certificate.

6. The examination bye-law permits correction subject to only reasonable restrictions. If such drastic correctio