SCA/869520/2008 4/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8695 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI ================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================= SHINOD BABU MATHUNNI - Petitioner(s) Versus THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER & 2 - Respondent(s) ================================================= Appearance : MR DEVANG VYAS for Petitioner. Mr.SUNIT SHAH, GOVT PLEADER for respondent no. 1. Mr.HEMANG RAWAL FOR Mr.AD OZA for Respondent(s) : 2, MR CHETAN K PANDYA for Respondent(s) : 3, ================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI Date : 23/07/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT
Looking
to the question involved in the matter, at the request of the learned
advocate for the petitioner and with the consent of the learned
advocates for the respondents, the petition is taken up for final
hearing and disposal today.
2. Rule.
Service of rule is waived by Mr.Sunit Shah, learned Government
Pleader for respondent no.1; Mr.Hemang Rawal for Mr.A.D. Oza, learned
advocate for respondent no.2; and Mr.Chetan Pandya, learned advocate
for respondent no.3.
3. This
petition has been filed praying for following reliefs :
(A) This Hon’ble
Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing Gujarat Higher
Secondary Education Board to correct the mark sheet and certificate
of Standard 10th by writing his name in the correct
sequence as SHINOD BABU MATHUNNI.
(B) Pending hearing
and final disposal of this petition, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased
to direct the Asia English School to produce record with regard to
the name of the petitioner.
(C) This
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass such other order or orders as
this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case as well as in the interest of justice.
(D) This
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to award cost of this petition.
4. Brief
facts necessary for consideration to decide the matter are that the
petitioner is a student. It appears that the petitioner appeared at
the Secondary School Certificate Examination and on clearing the
examination a mark-sheet came to be issued by the respondent-Board.
The said mark-sheet bears the name ‘Babu Shinod Mathunni’. The case
of the petitioner is that the correct name is ‘Shinod Babu
Mathunni’. It is further stated by the petitioner that even in
passing certificate same error is committed.
5. On
the basis of various documents like certificate of registration
issued by Department of Panchayat, State of Kerala, the petitioner
moved the respondent Board for necessary corrections. According to
the petitioner the respondent Board did not respond, hence the
petition.
6. On
behalf of respondent No.2, it is stated that the Board has not
committed any error in mentioning the name of the petitioner either
in the mark-sheet or in the passing Certificate issued to the
petitioner because these documents are issued on the basis of the
information/ details furnished by the concerned school and the
student. The respondent-Board placed reliance on the Regulations,
more particularly Regulation No.12-A(6), to submit that no change is
possible in the record, once the student has left the school.
Admittedly, the petitioner had left the Secondary School, as
respondent No.3 – School has already issued School Leaving
Certificate. The regulation in question is framed with a view to
ensure that illegalities and malpractices are curbed and
unscrupulous persons do not take undue advantage by getting
entries corrected in the record subsequently. Another ground
pressed into service is that, prior to appearing at the S.S.C.
Examination the students are provided opportunity to correct their
names, date of birth and other particulars at the time of pre-list
and at the time of issuance of fee receipt/hall tickets. That the
petitioner having failed to get such correction at an appropriate
stage, he cannot claim any relief now. That in the circumstances, the
petition requires to be rejected.
7. If
the question is approached technically, the respondent-Board is
correct. But then, one has to bear in mind the real object behind
enacting Regulation 12-A(6) of the Regulations. The said provision
is meant for curbing malpractice and preventing unscrupulous persons
from obtaining an advantage which such persons do not deserve, the
respondent Board has also to take into consideration genuine cases
wherein errors have occurred. One cannot lose sight of the fact
that when human beings are involved in preparation and maintenance
of records there is every likelihood that an error may occur by a
slip of pen. Not only that, it is also not possible for a person to
locate the error at a given point of time and such a lapse may occur
for various reasons. However, for such a lapse a genuine bona fide
case where an error has crept-in, in the records cannot be thrown
out only on the ground of technicalities. The respondent- Board must
bear in mind that rules are meant to render real justice to the
people. The rules are not to be followed being unmindful of the
facts of a given case. There has to be a scope for application of
mind for distinguishing between genuine and bona fide case and
cases involving unscrupulous persons.
8. Reliance
on the procedure which is adopted at the stage when the pre-list is
prepared and the students are issued fee receipts/hall tickets to
submit that the petitioner could have got necessary correction
carried out at that stage may be an ideal situation. However, mere
failure to have the necessary correction carried out at that stage
by itself cannot dis-entitle a person from seeking such a
modification/correction of the record only because of such lapse on
part of such person. Moreover, a student who is preparing for the
Board examination is expected to be under stress and may not
carefully scrutinies the contents of the application form.
9. If
one examines the certificate of birth, the school leaving
certificates of Standards III, VII and XII, prima facie it appears
that the petitioner has been able to show that the record of the
respondent Board requires rectification. In the circumstances, the
petitioner is directed to approach respondent No.2 along with all
the aforesaid documents as well as any other documents which the
petitioner may like to rely on for seeking necessary correction in
the name of the petitioner in relation to record of respondent
No.2. Upon the petitioner so approaching, respondent No.2 shall
carry out necessary correction in the records maintained by
respondent No.2 including the mark-sheet and the examination/
passing certificate issued by respondent No.2 after verifying the
genuineness of the documents presented before respondent No.2 by
the petitioner. The petitioner shall approach respondent No.2
within a period of two weeks from today, who in turn shall do the
needful within next two weeks. It will be open to respondent No.2
to charge necessary fees, if any, in accordance with the rules and
regulations on the subject.
10. The
petition is allowed. Rule made absolute. Taking into consideration
the facts and circumstances it would serve the ends of justice if the
petitioner is directed to pay costs of this petition to respondent
No.2 which are quantified at a sum of Rs.250/- (Rupees two hundred
and fifty only). Direct service permitted.
(RAVI R. TRIPATHI, J.)
karim