Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
1. Petitioner passed High School Examination from Uttarakhand Board of School Education, in the year 2021. According to her, in the High School
Certificate, name of her father has been wrongly mentioned as ‘Manoj Chandra Joshi’, which needs to be corrected as ‘Mohan
Chandra’. It is further the case of petitioner that name of her mother has also been wrongly mentioned as ‘Basanti Joshi’, which needs to
be corrected as ‘Basanti’ in the High School Certificate issued by Uttarakhand Board.
2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-
“i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned decision of Respondent No. 1 communicated vide
letter dated 13-02-2024 (Annexure No. 7) whereby claim of Petitioner seeking correction in her parental names in high school certificate
and marksheet has been rejected.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents, to consider the request of Petitioner seeking
correction in high school certificate-cum-marksheet issued by the Respondent Board on 31-07-2021 and consequently issue new certificate-
cum-marksheet after replacing names of her mother and father with their correct names i.e. Basanti and Mohan Chandra respectively.â€
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that name of petitioner’s both parents is correctly mentioned as ‘Mohan Chandra’ and
‘Basanti’ in the Inter Mediate Examination Certificate issued by the same Board, but strangely, the Board is not considering petitioner’s
request for correction of name of her parents in High School Certificate. He further submits that name of petitioner’s parents was correctly
mentioned in the school record and the Principal of the concerned School has certified that name of petitioner’s father is ‘Mohan Chandra’
while that of her mother is ’Basanti’.
4. Learned counsel for the Board, however, submits that petitioner’s request for correction was turned down on the ground that Regulation 27
permits correction only when name as recorded in the certificate/marksheet is absurd.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner, however, relies upon a judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (Minor)
(through guardian/father Hari Singh) vs. Central Board of Secondary Education & Other,s reported in (2021) 7 SCC 535. Paragraph nos. 193
& 193.1 of the said judgment are reproduced below:-
“193. The first is where the incumbent wants “correction†in the certificate issued by the CBSE to be made consistent with the
particulars mentioned in the school records.
193.1. As we have held, there is no reason for the CBSE to turn down such request or attach any precondition except reasonable period of
limitation and keeping in mind the period for which the CBSE has to maintain its record under the extant regulations. While doing so, it can
certainly insist for compliance of other conditions by the incumbent, such as, to file sworn affidavit making necessary declaration and to
indemnify the CBSE from any claim against it by third party because of such correction. The CBSE would be justified in insisting for
surrender/return of the original certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as the case may be) issued by it for replacing it with the fresh
certificate to be issued after carrying out necessary corrections with caption/annotation against the changes carried out and the date of such
correction. It may retain the original entries as it is except in respect of correction of name effected in exercise of right to be forgotten. The
fresh certificate may also contain disclaimer that the CBSE cannot be held responsible for the genuineness of the school records produced
by the incumbent in support of the request to record correction in the original CBSE certificate. The CBSE can also insist for reasonable
prescribed fees to be paid by the incumbent in lieu of administrative expenses for issuing fresh certificate.â€
6. This Court finds some substance in the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Incorrect description of name of parents in the High School
Certificate will result in identity crisis to the petitioner, especially, when name of her parents has been mentioned differently in the Inter Mediate
Marksheet and Certificate issued by the Board.
7. Mr. Virendra Singh Rawat, learned counsel appearing for the Board submits that if petitioner makes fresh application for correction, with all
supporting documents, including certificate issued by Principal of the concerned School, then competent authority in the Board shall take decision
thereupon in the light of the law declared by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
8. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make fresh application for correction of name of her parents in her High
School Certificate. If she makes such application within two weeks, supported by all necessary documents, including certificate issued by the
Principal, then the competent authority in the Board shall take decision on petitioner’s request, within six weeks thereafter, by passing a reasoned
order.
