High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2021-12-20Writ petition disposed of as above; the petitio...

Aswathy Viswambharan v. The Central Board of Secondary Education and The Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Chennithala

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Sathish Ninan
Judgment Date: 2021-12-20
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petition disposed of as above. The Court directs that the petitioner may file a fresh application for change of date of birth in the Class X certificate through the second respondent school, and the first respondent (CBSE) shall consider the same in light of the Supreme Court’s Jigya Yadav framework and dehors Exhibit P12, subject to the conditions enumerated by the Apex Court: (a) affidavit with undertaking and indemnity; (b) payment of administrative expenses; (c) public notice and gazette publication; (d) surrender of the original certificate; (e) a fresh certificate may include a disclaimer.
Final Disposition: Writ petition disposed of as above; the petitioner to be afforded a fresh opportunity to pursue a change under the Jigya Yadav framework, with conditions as imposed by the Apex Court.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Aswathy Viswambharan

Respondents

The Central Board of Secondary Education
The Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Chennithala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• C. S. Manilal
• S. Nidheesh

Counsels for Respondents

• Nirmal S.

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, Aswathy Viswambharan, seeks correction of her date of birth in CBSE school records and in the CBSE X certificate. CBSE rejected the request by Ext. P12 dated 18 August 2021, prompting the petitioner to approach this Court. She asserts a date of birth of 05 February 1988, supported by Ext. P2 birth certificate (Mavelikkara Municipality), Ext. P3 passport, and Ext. P4 Aadhaar. The petitioner completed 10th standard in 2002 and explains the delay in filing due to passport application and being away from the station. The judgment cites Jigya Yadav v. CBSE (SC) 2021 (3) KLT 711, noting a two-category framework: (i) “correction” to align certificates with school records, and (ii) “change” when public documents differ; the latter allows changes yet under the Indian Evidence Act’s presumptions regarding public documents and with reasonable conditions. The Court enumerates potential conditions: an affidavit with declaration and indemnity; payment of administrative expenses; publication in the official gazette; surrender of the original certificate; a fresh certificate may include a disclaimer. Although delay exists, the Court finds the explanation acceptable and directs a fresh application to be considered afresh by the CBSE, guided by Jigya Yadav and dehors Exhibit P12. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Provisions of Law Cited

Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Legal presumption relating to public documents under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Two-category framework for corrections vs. change (Jigya Yadav v. CBSE)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that her date of birth is 05.02.1988 and should be corrected in the X certificate to reflect the birth date supported by public documents (Exts. P2–P4). She explains a delay due to passport processing and travel, and relies on Jigya Yadav v. CBSE (SC) to categorise the Board’s power to correct/change entries; she seeks afresh consideration of a change under the framework that public documents presumes accuracy and may require reasonable conditions.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents maintain the Board’s Ext. P12 dated 18.08.2021 denying the change; they rely on established board policy and contend that the petition should be dismissed unless a fresh, properly supported application shows compelling reason to alter the public record; the respondents argue for adherence to due process and adherence to the Board’s rules in granting any change.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Jigya Yadav v. CBSE	2021 (3) KLT 711	Positive	The judgment relies on Jigya Yadav to classify corrections vs changes and approves changing CBSE certificates to conform with public documents under the Indian Evidence Act, subject to conditions, which the present case applies to permit a change in birth date.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Aswathy Viswambharan v. The Central Board of Secondary Education and The Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Chennithala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN** **MONDAY, THE 20[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943** ## **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** ASWATHY VISWAMBHARAN, [AGED 49 YEARS] * CORRECTED D/O. VISWAMBARAN, ELAVUMKALATHU VISWABHAVANAM, PATHIYOOR, KEERIKKAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY, P.A. PRASAD, S/O. AYYAPPAN, AGED 49 YEARS, PALATHINPATTA HOUSE, WEST OTHARA P.O., THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADVS. C.S.MANILAL S.NIDHEESH ## **RESPONDENTS:** 1 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, 1630-A, J BLOCK, ANNA ANGAR WEST, CHENNAI 600040. 2 THE JAWAHAR NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA CHENNITHALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL, NAVODAYA,CHENNITHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 690 105. BY ADV SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THE AGE OF PETITIONER CORRECTED AS '33' INSTEAD OF '49' AS PER ORDER DATED 25/01/2022 IN I.A. 1/2022 IN WP(C).NO.22973/21 **==> picture [138 x 22] intentionally omitted <==** 2 **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** ## **J U D G M E N T** The request of the petitioner for correction of date of birth in the school records and the records of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) was turned down by the Board as per Ext.P12 communication dated 18.08.2021. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court. The petitioner confines her relief for correction of the alleged error in the Xth Standard certificate issued to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is presently working in Dubai as a Laboratory Analyst. She is represented in these proceedings by the duly authorized power of attorney. According to the petitioner, her date of birth is **05.02.1988** , but has been erroneously recorded in the school records as **25.05.1989** . The petitioner relies on Ext.P2 birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Mavelikkara Municipality, Ext.P3 passport and also Ext.P4 Adhar Card to substantiate the same. 3 **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** 3. The petitioner completed her 10[th] standard in the year 2002. She seeks for correction of the school records only at this distance of time. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the mistake was noticed only when application was submitted for passport. Thereafter since she was not in station was unable to do the needful, and thus occurred the delay. 4. The right of a student of the Board to seek for correction/change of the particulars in the school records and the certificates issued by the Board has been dealt with exhaustively by the Apex Court in _**Jigya Yadav v. CBSE [2021 (3) KLT 711**_ _**(SC)]**_ . The situations were divided into two categories namely, where “correction” is sought and, where “change” is sought. Under the category of “corrections” the Apex Court included cases where the certificates issued by the Board were required to be made consistent with the particulars mentioned in the school records. In the category of “change” of particulars, two situations were contemplated-firstly, where by the records of 4 **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** the Board provide particulars different from that provided in public documents like birth certificate, aadhar card, election card etc. and secondly, a case of request for change of name consequent to the acquisition of a name by choice at a later point of time. 5. In the case at hand, the issue involved relates to “change” of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE to make it consistent with public documents and hence would fall within the first classification, of the second category. With regard to the said cases, the Apex Court observed that the legal presumption in relation to public documents as envisaged in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 cannot be ignored by the Board. It was accordingly held that, request for effecting such changes in the certificates issued by the Board, to make it in conformity with the public documents, could be entertained. It was further observed by the Apex Court that the Board is entitled to impose reasonable conditions while considering such request. The 5 **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** conditions observed by the Apex Court are:- - (a) An affidavit containing a declaration and an undertaking - to indemnify the Board. - (b) Payment of fee for administrative expenses. (c) The Board may in a given case, depending on the facts, require effecting of public notice and publication in the official gazette. - (d) Require surrender of the original certificate. (e) A fresh certificate issued may contain disclaimer and caption/annotation against the original entry. (Except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of 'right to be forgotten'.) 6. While it is true that there has been delay on the part of the petitioner in seeking for the “change”, the explanation offered by the petitioner could be accepted. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner's request is liable to be considered afresh. 6 **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** 7. Accordingly it is ordered that, on the petitioner submitting a fresh application for change of date of birth in the class X certificate through the second respondent school on complying with the requirements as above, then the first respondent shall consider the same in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court referred to supra and dehors Exhibit P12 communication dated 18.08.2021. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- **SATHISH NINAN** **JUDGE** rsr 7 **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22973/2021** PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 23/12/2019. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH ISSUED BY THE MAVELIKKARA MUNICIPALITY. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER. - Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ADAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF XTH STANDARD WITH THE MARK LIST ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. - Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF 12TH STANDARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. - Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF 12TH STANDARD EXAMINATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. - Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO THE PRINCIPAL OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29.11.2019. - Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29/11/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. - Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 22/6/2021. - Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 31/3/2021 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT. 8 ## **WP(C) NO. 22973 OF 2021** Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 18/8/2021.