Sagar S. v. Central Board of Secondary Education and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR** **FRIDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 4TH ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 11974 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** **SAGAR S, AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SAJIMON K.S., KUZHIKANDATHIL HOUSE, NEENDOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN-686601.** **BY ADVS.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY K. REMIYA RAMACHANDRAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREETHI VIHAR, NEW DELHI, PIN111092, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **2 REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION** - **REGIONAL OFFICE, L.I.C.DIVISIONAL OFFICE CAMPUS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN-695004.** - **3 REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION PLOT NO.1630 A, J BLOCK, 15TH MAIN ROAD, ANNANAGAR WEST, CHENNAI, PIN-600040.** - **4 MANGALAM ENGLISH MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL, VETTIMUKAL P.O., ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM, PIN686631.** **BY ADV SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 2 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 ## **W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021** ## **-----------------------------------------------** ## **J U D G M E N T** Petitioner is an Engineering Graduate. In his tenth class marks statement issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education (the Board), the names of his parents have been shown mistakenly as Saji and Deepa Sajin, instead of Sajimon K.S and Deepa S. It is stated by the petitioner that the mistake in the marks statement as regards the name of his father occurred due to the mistake in the entry pertaining to the name of his father in his birth certificate and he does not know as to how the mistake as regards the name of his mother occurred in the marks statement issued by the Board. It is also stated by the petitioner that having noticed the mistake as regards the names of his parents in his birth certificate, the petitioner took steps for correction of the same, and the entries 3 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 relating to the names of his parents in the birth certificate have been corrected as Sajimon K.S and Deepa.S. Ext.P3 is the corrected birth certificate of the petitioner. After obtaining Ext.P3, the petitioner preferred an application before the second respondent, the Regional Officer of the Board in the State of Kerala through the school where he studied, for correction of the entries in the marks statement pertaining to the names of his parents. The application preferred by the petitioner was, however, turned down by the second respondent as per Ext.P4 communication addressed to the Principal of the School. It is stated by the second respondent in Ext.P4 communication that in the light of Rule 69.1(i) of the CBSE Examination Bye Laws, requests for changes in the names of the parents of the candidates can be considered only when changes have been notified in the Government Gazette and admitted by a court of law before publication of the results of the candidates and that since the petitioner has not notified 4 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 the desired changes in the Government Gazette and since the desired changes have not been accepted by any court before publication of the results of the examination, the request made by the petitioner cannot be considered. Ext.P4 is under challenge in the writ petition. 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the Board by its Standing Counsel justifying the stand taken in Ext.P4 communication. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the Board. 4. Placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in **Jigya Yadav v. C.B.S.E. and others** (Civil Appeal No.3905 of 2011 and connected cases), the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Board is bound to afford to the students opportunity to modify the information contained in the marks statements subject to complying with the requisite formalities which are reasonable in nature and that the W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 5 provision in the Bye Laws that the information contained in the marks statements cannot be changed after publication of the results of the examination is excessively restrictive and imposes unreasonable restrictions on the exercise of the rights of the students under Article 19 of the Constitution. It was also submitted by the learned counsel, placing reliance on the said judgment that when a request for change of information contained in the marks statements is made on the basis of public documents which are presumed to be genuine in terms of the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, the Board is bound to consider the same. According to the learned counsel, in the light of the said decision of the Apex Court, Ext.P4 communication issued by the second respondent is unsustainable in law. 5. Per contra, placing reliance on the very same decision of the Apex Court relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the Board 6 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 contended that the Board cannot verify the genuineness of the public documents relied on by the candidates for seeking correction in the marks statements and certificates and therefore, it is obligatory for the parties concerned to obtain orders of the court for seeking correction of the information furnished in the marks statements and certificates. The learned Standing Counsel relied on paragraph 150 of the judgment in the said case, in support of his contention. 6. I have examined the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties on either side. 7. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it has been held by the Apex Court in **Jigya Yadav** that the Board is bound to afford to the students opportunity to modify the information contained in the marks statements subject to complying with the requisite formalities which are reasonable in nature and that the provision in the Bye Laws that the information contained in the marks W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 7 statements cannot be changed after publication of the results of the examination is excessively restrictive and imposes unreasonable restrictions on the exercise of the rights of the students under Article 19 of the Constitution. It was also held by the Apex Court in the said case that when a request for change of information contained in the marks statement is made on the basis of the public documents which are presumed to be genuine in terms of the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, the Board is bound to consider the request. Paragraphs 140, 171 and 172 of the judgment in the said case read thus: “ **140** . We, thus, hold that the provision regarding change of name“post publication of examination results” is excessively restrictive and imposes unreasonable restrictions on the exercise of rights under Article 19. We make it clear that the provision for change of name is clearly severable from those for corrections in name/date of birth and therefore, our determination shall not affect them except as regards the condition of limitation period, in terms of the aforesaid discussion and guidelines stated later. 8 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 ## x x x x x 171. As regards request for “change” of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE, it presupposes that the particulars intended to be recorded in the CBSE certificate are not consistent with the school records. Such a request could be made in two different situations. The first is on the basis of public documents like Birth Certificate, Aadhaar Card/Election Card, etc. and to incorporate change in the CBSE certificate consistent therewith. The second possibility is when the request for change is due to the acquired name by choice at a later point of time. That change need not be backed by public documents pertaining to the candidate. (a) Reverting to the first category, as noted earlier, there is a legal presumption in relation to the public documents as envisaged in the 1872 Act. Such public documents, therefore, cannot be ignored by the CBSE. Taking note of those documents, the CBSE may entertain the request for recording change in the certificate issued by it. This, however, need not be unconditional, but subject to certain reasonable conditions to be fulfilled by the applicant as may be prescribed by the CBSE, such as, of furnishing sworn affidavit containing declaration and to indemnify the CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees in lieu of administrative expenses. The CBSE may also insist for issuing Public Notice and publication in the Official Gazette before recording the change in the fresh certificate to be issued by it upon surrender/return of the 9 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) by the applicant. The fresh certificate 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) indicating the date on which change has been recorded and the basis thereof. In other words, the fresh certificate may retain original particulars while recording the change along with caption/annotation referred to above (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten). (b) However, in the latter situation where the change is to be effected on the basis of new acquired name without any supporting school record or public document, that request may be entertained upon insisting for prior permission/declaration by a Court of law in that regard and publication in the Official Gazette including surrender/return of original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) issued by CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees. The fresh certificate as in other situations referred to above, retain the original entry (except in respect of change of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten) and to insert caption/annotation indicating the date on which it has been recorded and other details including disclaimer of CBSE. This is so because the CBSE is not required to adjudicate nor has the mechanism to verify the correctness of the claim of the applicant. 10 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 172. In light of the above, in exercise of our plenary jurisdiction, we direct the CBSE to process the applications for correction or change, as the case may be, in the certificate issued by it in the respective cases under consideration. Even other pending applications and future applications for such request be processed on the same lines and in particular the conclusion and directions recorded hitherto in paragraphs 170 and 171, as may be applicable, until amendment of relevant Byelaws. Additionally, the CBSE shall take immediate steps to amend its relevant Byelaws so as to incorporate the stated mechanism for recording correction or change, as the case may be, in the certificates already issued or to be issued by it” 8. Reverting to the facts, the request of the petitioner for correction of the entries relating to the names of his parents in the marks statement was made on the basis of Ext.P3 corrected birth certificate. In Ext.P3 birth certificate, the name of the father of the petitioner is shown as Sajimon K.S. and the name of the mother is shown as Deepa S. Ext.P3 being a public document which is presumed to be genuine in 11 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 terms of the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, according to me, in the light of the directions issued by the Apex Court in **Jigya Yadav,** the second respondent ought to have allowed the corrections sought for by the petitioner in the marks statement as regards the names of his parents subject to appropriate conditions. 9. The relevant portion of paragraph 150 of the judgment in **Jigya Yadav** relied on by the learned Standing Counsel for the Board reads thus: “150 . . . . . . . when it comes to recording any information in the original certificate issued by the CBSE which is not consistent with the school records, it is essential that the CBSE must insist for supporting public document which has presumptive value and in the given case declaration by a Court of law to incorporate such a change. In that regard, the CBSE can insist for additional conditions to reassure itself and safeguard its interest against any claim by a third party/body because of changes incorporated by it pursuant to application made by the candidate. In the concluding paragraph, we intend to issue directions to the CBSE Board in light of the discussion in this judgment. For the nature of uniform directions that we propose to issue 12 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 so as to obviate any inconsistent approach in the cases under consideration including future cases to be dealt with by the CBSE Board, it is not necessary for us to dilate on the question of validity of the respective amendments in the relevant Byelaws effected from time to time. “ As noted, in paragraph 150 of the judgment extracted above, the learned Judges of the Apex Court have indicated that in the light of the discussion therein, directions would be issued to the Board in the concluding paragraphs of the judgment. In the light of the unambiguous direction issued by the Apex court in the concluding paragraphs of the judgment which are extracted in paragraph 7 above, I do not find any substance in the contention raised by the learned Standing counsel for the Board that an adjudication by a court of law is required for considering an application for correction of any entry in the marks statement of a candidate based on a public document which is presumed to be genuine in terms of the provisions in the Indian Evidence Act. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the 13 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 second respondent is directed to carry out the corrections sought for by the petitioner in his tenth class marks statement (Ext.P1) as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is, however, made clear that the Board would be free to impose appropriate conditions to be complied with by the petitioner for carrying out the corrections, as indicated by the Apex Court in the judgment in **Jigya Yadav.** **Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE** ds 14 W.P.(C) No.11974 of 2021 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11974/2021** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURE** ## **Exhibit P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE MARKS STATEMENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION FOR THE 10TH CLASS EXAMINATION DATED 19.5.2014.** ## **Exhibit P2** **TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE DATED 15.3.2002 ISSUED FROM THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY.** ## **Exhibit P3** **TRUE COPY OF THE CORRECTED BIRTH CERTIFICATE DATED 25.9.2018 ISSUED FROM THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY.** - **Exhibit P4** **TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 3.4.2020 BEARING NO.CBSE/RO-TVPM/M AND M-2702/2020 ALONG WITH THE TYPED COPY OF THE SAME SINCE EXHIBIT P4 IS NOT LEGIBLE.**