SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 36735

Savitri – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No. 47098 of 2025



##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:17577

1 WP-47098-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

th

ON THE 19 OF JUNE, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 47098 of 2025

SAVITRI

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Shankar Singh Tomar - Advocate for the petitioner [P-1].

Ms. Smrati Sharma appearing on behalf of Advocate General[r-1].

Shri Mayank Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent [R-4].

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226

of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:

7.1 यह(cid:3)क, (cid:5)ितयािचकाकता (cid:10) कमांक 2 को िनद(cid:16)िशत कर यािचकाकता (cid:10) के

(cid:5)करण /ज(cid:22)मितिथ सुधार आवेदनप(cid:30) का शी(cid:32) िनराकरण करने एवं

यािचकाकता (cid:10) क(cid:34) दसवी क(cid:34) अंकसूची म(cid:37) अं(cid:3)कत (cid:30)ु(cid:3)टपूण (cid:10) ज(cid:22)म (cid:3)दनांक

16.06.2006 को सह(cid:39) ज(cid:22)म(cid:3)दनांक 22. 08.2007 से संशोधन करने का

आदेश पा(cid:40)रत करने क(cid:34) (cid:5)ाथन(cid:10) ा है।

7.2 यह(cid:3)क, यािचकाकता (cid:10) को (cid:5)करण क(cid:34) प(cid:40)र(cid:43)थितय(cid:44) को देखते हुए

माननीय (cid:22)यायालय जो उिचत समझे (cid:22)याय(cid:3)हत म(cid:37) अ(cid:22)य मा(cid:3)फक

सहायता (cid:3)दलाई जाने क(cid:34) (cid:5)ाथन(cid:10) ा है।

2. The petitioner has approached this court for a direction to the

respondent No.1/Board to carry out requisite correction regarding his date of

birth in his mark-sheet of Class-10th (Annexure P/4). The case of the

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR

Signing time: 22-06-2026

19:36:30

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:17577

2 WP-47098-2025

petitioner is that, as per the Birth Certificate (Annexure P/8), his date of birth

is 22.08.2007. However, due to an inadvertent error, his date of birth has

been incorrectly recorded as 16.06.2006 in the mark-sheet of Class X. It is

submitted that the petitioner has consistently been recorded with the correct

date of birth, i.e., 22.08.2007, in her educational records prior to the issuance

of the Class X mark-sheet. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the mark-

sheet of Class VIII (Annexure P/6) and the mark-sheet of Class IX

(Annexure P/5), both of which correctly mention the petitioner's date of birth

as 22.08.2007. Upon discovering the aforesaid discrepancy, the petitioner

submitted an application dated 01.07.2025 before the respondent/Board

seeking correction of his date of birth in the Class X mark-sheet. However,

the respondent/Board, vide communication dated 27.10.2025, rejected the

petitioner's request solely on the ground that, in terms of Order dated

14.01.2015, applications for correction of date of birth can be considered

only within a period of three years from the date of declaration of the

examination result, and that applications submitted beyond the said period

are barred by limitation. The communication dated 27.10.2025, in substance,

states that since the petitioner had appeared in the High School Examination,

2022, and the application for correction was submitted beyond the prescribed

period of three years, the case was treated as time-barred and, therefore,

correction of the date of birth was not possible.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a decision of

this Court in the matter of Isha Mongia Vs. Central Board of Secondary

Education to contend that on account of any inadvertent mistake, the student

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR

Signing time: 22-06-2026

19:36:30

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:17577

3 WP-47098-2025

should not suffer for any wrong entry made in the mark-sheet and

accordingly, the petition was entertained directing the Board to issue the

mark sheet of Class 10th and 12th examination mentioning the correct name

of the father of petitioner in that case.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent/Board, however, submits that as

per Clause (ii) the order of the respondent/Board dated 14.01.2015, an

application for correction of the date of birth can be considered only when

the same is

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top