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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53479

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
SARANYA SREEKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 26088 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.SUMODH MADHAVAN NAIR, SRI.SYLVESTER ESMOND RAPHAEL, SMT.S.AGILA
For the Respondents: SRI.MANJUNATH MENON, SMT.ARYA RAGHUNATH, SRI. NIRMAL S., SC.

Petition for correction of date of birth in academic records based on established documentation is granted.

Headnote:This Writ Petition arises under WP

(C) No. 26088 of 2025 where the petitioner requests a correction of date of birth error in her SSLC marks statement. The court finds the corrected date of birth as per school records and public documents is 30.03.1990. The court directs the petitioner to apply for correction with the school, which will forward to CBSE, who must respond in accordance with established principles. The Writ Petition is allowed as above.

Table of Content
1. factual background of petitioner's educational records and correction request. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. acknowledgment of the time-bar argument by the respondent. (Para 4)
3. directions provided by the court for correction process with timelines. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

Petitioner has completed her SSLC from the second respondent school on 24.05.2005, and was issued a marks statement by the first respondent CBSE. The petitioner also pursued the Plus Two course from the same school, and after completion of her Plus Two in the year 2007, she obtained admission in B.Tech (Computer Science).

2. When the petitioner applied for a job, she came to know that there was an error in the date of birth entered in the class X marks statement, Ext.P1, where erroneously the date was shown as 31.03.1990 instead of 30.03.1990, which is the date of birth as seen from the certificate given by the local authority. The petitioner also submits that in the Aadhar card as well as in the passport, the date of birth is correctly shown as 30.03.1990 and seeks correction of the mistaken entry in the marks certificate.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent school stating that the Admission Register of the school also shows that the date of birth is recorded as 30.03.1990, and produced Ext.R2(b) Admission Register. Under such circumstances, it is clear that the date of birth of the petitioner is 30.03.1990, going by the records referred to above.

4. A statement has been filed on behalf of the first respondent, CBSE, stating that the request of the petitioner for correction is time-barred.

5. Taking note of the facts stated above, including the records maintained by the school and the local authority, and other public records also referred to above, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to make an application to the second respondent school within two weeks from today. The application, along with the requisite documents, shall be forwarded by the second respondent to the first respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of the application from the petitioner. On receipt of the application, the first respondent will pass orders in accordance with the principles stated in the judgment inJigya Yadav (Minor) through Guardian/Father Hari Singh v. C.B.S.E. and others [(2021) 7 SCC 535], within three weeks thereafter.

The Writ Petition is allowed as above.

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