High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2020-10-22Writ petitions allowed; corrections of names in...

Shini N.A. v. Central Board of Secondary Education (Head Office) and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).Nos.17626 of 2020 and 17690 of 2020

Neutral Citation:/

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P.V. ASHA
Judgment Date: 2020-10-22
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petitions allowed. The orders rejecting the corrections are set aside. The court directed the third respondent to forward the applications to the second respondent and to correct the names of the parents in WP(C) No. 17626 of 2020 and both the parents’ and student’s names in WP(C) No. 17690 of 2020, within the five-year correction window from the Class X examination as per Rule 69.1 of the CBSE Byelaws (amended 01.02.2018). It also implied that corrections constituting spelling changes are permissible within the specified period, and the CBSE authorities must process the corrections accordingly.”,
Final Disposition: Writ petitions allowed; corrections of names in CBSE records directed; rejection orders set aside; CBSE to process corrections within the five-year window from Class X results and forward applications to the Regional Office for implementation.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Shini N.A.

Respondents

Central Board of Secondary Education (Head Office) — Shiksha Kendra, Preet Vihar, Delhi-110 092, represented by its Secretary
Central Board of Secondary Education Regional Office, LIC Divisional Office Campus, Pattam, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala-695004, represented by its Regional Officer
The Principal, National Huda Central School, Orumanayoor P.O., Thrissur-680512

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. R. Divakaran

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri. Nirmal S., Standing Counsel, CBSE

Case Synopsis & Summary

Two writ petitions filed by Shini N.A., mother of Neha Mohamedmon and Nowreen Mohamedmon, challenge the CBSE-run school and CBSE authorities for refusing to correct the names of the parents and the students in the school leaving certificates and related documents. The petitions pertain to issues at the CBSE-operated National HUDA Central School, Orumanayoor, Thrissur, where the mother’s name appears inconsistently across documents as Shini N.A., Shiny Mohamedmon, and similar variants, while the student’s name is shown as Nowreen Mohamedmon instead of Nowreen Mohamedmon. The petitioner seeks correction of these clerical/name entries by relying on CBSE Examination Byelaws Rule 69.1(i) and (ii), which permit corrections for spelling mistakes within a five-year window from the date the student appeared for Class X. The respondents rejected the corrections, citing Rule 69.1(i)-(ii) and relying on Subin Mohammed v. Union of India. After hearing, the Court held that corrections within the five-year window are permissible; the rejection orders were set aside and directions issued to process corrections. The Court directed the third respondent to forward the applications to the second respondent and to effect the corrections in both WP(C) Nos. 17626 and 17690, thereby ensuring consistency of names across documents.”

Provisions of Law Cited

Rule 69.1(i) CBSE Examination ByelawsRule 69.1(ii) CBSE Examination Byelawsamendment effective 01-02-2018

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner argued that clerical/mistaken entries in the names of the parents and the student appear across critical records (birth, Aadhar, school certificates). They submitted Ext.P6 (application for correction) and Ext.P7 (forwarding letter), along with Ext.P8 (representation). They contended that Rule 69.1(i) and 69.1(ii) allow corrections of spelling mistakes within five years of the Class X appearance, and that the five-year window was still open when they filed the applications. They asserted that the corrections are essential for accurate identity documentation and for consistent record-keeping in examinations and government documents; the Respondents’ denial is inconsistent with the byelaws and causes ongoing hardship to the family.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contended that corrections to names fall under Rule 69.1(i) and 69.1(ii) only for spelling mistakes and within a limited timeframe; they relied on Annexure R1(a) denying changes because corrections should be limited to spelling within five years from Class X; they asserted that the names were submitted as per the admission form and that changes to names beyond the allowed period are not permissible, citing Subin Mohammed v. Union of India to justify non-permissibility of changes outside the window.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Subin Mohammed v. Union of India	(2016) 1 KLT 340	Mentioned Only	The judgment notes that respondents relied on this case; it is cited but not adopted or distinguished as a controlling ratio in the decision.

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 Shini N.A. v. Central Board of Secondary Education (Head Office) and Others 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 SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 30TH ASWINA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.17626 OF 2020(C)** ## **PETITIONER:** **SHINI N.A. AGED 44 YEARS W/O MOHAMEDMON,KATTATHEYIL HOUSE, BLANGAD.P.O,CHAVAKKAD,THRISSUR-680506.** **BY ADV. SRI.R.DIVAKARAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** |**1**|**CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION (HEAD OFFICE)**| |---|---| ||**“SHIKSHA KENDRA”,2,COMMUNITY CENTRE,PREET**| ||**VIHAR,DELHI-110 092,**| ||**REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.**| |**2**|**CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION,**| ||**REGIONAL OFFICE,2ND FLOOR,BLOCK-B,**| ||**LIC DIVISIONAL OFFICE CAMPUS,**| ||**PATTAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,**| ||**KERALA-695004,REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICER.**| |**3**|**THE PRINCIPAL,**| ||**NATIONAL HUDA CENTRAL SCHOOL,**| ||**ORUMANAYOOR.P.O,THRISSUR-680 512.**| **R1 TO R2 BY SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).17690/2020(I), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 2 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 30TH ASWINA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.17690 OF 2020(I)** ## **PETITIONER:** **SHINI N.A AGED 44 YEARS** **W/O. MOHAMEDMON, KATTATHEYIL HOUSE, BLANGAD P.O., CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 506.** **BY ADV. SRI.R.DIVAKARAN** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION (HEAD OFFICE) “SHIKSHA KENDRA”, 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, DELHI-110 092 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **2 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, BLOCK-B, LIC DIVISIONAL OFFICE CAMPUS, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICER.** - **3 THE PRINCIPAL NATIONAL HUDA CENTRAL SCHOOL, ORUMANAYOOR P.O., THRISSUR-680 512.** **R1 TO R2 BY SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2020, ALONG WITH WP(C).17626/2020(C), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 3 ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 22[nd] day of October 2020** Petitioner in both the writ petitions is the mother of Neha Mohamedmon and Nowreen Mohamedmon, who were studying in the third respondent school, which is run under the C.B.S.E. 2. In W.P.(C)No.17626 of 2020, the complaint of the petitioner is that her name, that is the mother of the student is shown as “SHINI N.A” in her school leaving certificate, aadhar card etc. and that of her husband is shown as “MOHAMEDMON”. At the same time in the certificate issued to her daughter, the name of the mother is shown as “SHINY MOHAMED MON” and that of the father is shown as “K MOHAMED MON” instead of “SHINI.N.A” and “MOHAMEDMON”. She submitted Ext.P6 application for correction of the name of the parents of the student. The writ petition was filed stating that there is no response to the application and thereafter another representation WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 **==> picture [8 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** was submitted. Similarly in the case of W.P.(C) No.17690 of 2020, the complaint was that the name her daughter as well as the parents were shown as “NOWREEN MOHAMED MON”, “SHYNI” AND “MOHAMED MON” and it has to be corrected as “NOWREEN MOHAMEDMON”, “SHINI N.A” and “MOHAMEDMON”. There also Ext.P6 application was submitted, for which also it was stated that there is no response to the application. 3. The respondents have filed a statement producing Annexure R1(a) dated 18.09.2020 by which both the applications were rejected separately stating that in accordance with Rule 69.1(ii)request cannot be allowed. By Annexure R1(a)in W.P.(C)No.17626 of 2020, the respondents informed that the name of the parents were shown in accordance with the details furnished in the admission form and no action was taken when the student was studying and so it was stated as per Rule 69.1(i) and 69.1(ii) of CBSE examination byelaws the change of name cannot be WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 5 allowed as correction is required in the name. The respondents have stated that in accordance with the provisions contained in Rule 69.1(i) of the byelaws as amended on 01.02.2018 correction is permissible only in respect of the mistakes in the spelling. However, it is also stated that the correction can be made within a period of five years of the publication of results. The respondents have also relied on the judgment in Subin Mohammed v. Union of India [2016 1 KLT 340]. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel. 5. The provision for correction of change of name, is available for a period of five years from the date on which the student appeared in the class X examination. If the applications are seen filed within the said period, I am of the view that the applications are liable to be allowed. Therefore, the orders rejecting the WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 **==> picture [8 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** application of petitioner are set aside. There shall be a direction to the third respondent to forward the applications of the petitioner to the second respondent and the second respondent to correct the name of the parents in W.P.(C)No.17626 of 2020 and that of the parents as well as the student in W.P.(C)No.17690 of 2020. **Sd/-** **P.V.ASHA** **JUDGE** DK WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 7 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17626/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER ISSUED FROM THE GURUVAYOOR MUNICIPALITY** - **EXHIBIT P2 THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER** - **EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ADHAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER** - **EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND ISSUED BY THE KADAPPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH** - **EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.4345108 DATED 28.05.2016** - **EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23.12.2019** - **EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 23.12.2019** - **EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.07.2020.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02.04.2020 SEND BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT THROUGH E-MAIL ANNEXURE R1(a)** - **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 02.04.2020** WP(C).Nos.17626 & 17690 OF 2020 8 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17690/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER ISSUED FROM THE GURUVAYOOR MUNICIPALITY.** - **EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL** - **EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ADHAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND ISSUED BY THE KADAPPURAM GRAMAPANCHAYATH.** - **EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.4349568 DATED 6.5.2019.** **EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 23.12.2019.** **EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.7.2020.** - **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 08.04.2020**