THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.11357 of 2025

ORDER:

The case of the petitioner, precisely as per the writ affidavit, is that his mother (Mrs. Saripella Sai Lavanya) was initially married to Mr. M. Nageswara Rao in the year 2006, and out of the wedlock, the petitioner was born on 28.03.2009. Matrimonial disputes arose between his parents, and his parents have legally separated on 18.08.2017 vide the Judgment and Decree dated 18.08.2017 in O.P.No.264 of 2017 on the file of XVI Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-XVI Additional metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District. It is the further case of the petitioner that since his childhood, the petitioner has been living with his mother, and his biological father has not even sought visitation rights for him during the pendency of the divorce petition, and the divorce decree dated 18.08.2017 has become final. After obtaining divorce, his mother married Mr. G. Lakshmi Prasad on 24.11.2017 and ever since the petitioner has been living with his mother and stepfather. The petitioner completed his 10^th Class examination in the year 2024 from St. Martin’s High School, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, which is affiliated to the 2^nd respondent-Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE); and his 10^th Class mark sheet bear the name of his biological father. It is the grievance of the petitioner that he submitted an application for change of name of the father in his 10^th Class certificate, as per Chapter 9, Clause 69.1 of the CBSE Examination by-laws, 1995 (updated in January 2013), however, the 2^nd respondent is insisting the petitioner to produce No Objection Certificate from his biological father. It is the contention of the petitioner that his biological father has legally separated from his mother by obtaining divorce way back in 2017, and the petitioner completed his 10^thClass in 2024, and therefore the 2^nd respondent’s insistence for No Objection Certificate from biological father is arbitrary and illegal.

2. Heard Mrs. G. Sindhu, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mrs. Annapurna Sriram, learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner essentially contends that the mother of the petitioner and the biological father of the petitioner are legally separated by divorce vide Judgment and Decree dated 18.08.2017; and it is the petitioner’s specific unrebutted contention, based on the divorce proceedings in O.P.No.264 of 2017, that his biological father has never even visited him, and the petitioner has been living with his mother and his stepfather since 2017, and therefore the insistence for NOC from the biological father is arbitrary and illegal, and against the provision under Chapter 9, Clause 69.1 of the CBSE Examination by-laws, 1995 (updated in January 2013).

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent essentially contends that the impugned action is in accordance with the procedural requirement under the CBSE by-laws, and therefore the same cannot be termed illegal and arbitrary.

5. Having considered the respective contentions and perused the record, it is to be noted at the outset that the petitioner’s biological father, and mother, have divorced on 18.08.2017 (when the petitioner was about 8 years old), and the petitioner’s mother has remarried on 24.11.2017, and the petitioner has been living with his mother and stepfather, and the petitioner completed his 10^th Class in 2024, and his 10^th Class Certificate bears the name of his biological father under the Column relating to Parent/Guardian, which the petitioner wants to get it changed with his stepfather’s name as he is being looked after by his mother and stepfather. These being admitted facts, borne out by the record, insisting the petitioner to obtain No Objection Certificate from his biological father, cannot be sustained in the facts and circumstances of the case.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is a