Ayush Patel Thru. His Mother Namely Nisha Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 4 Others

Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5757 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ayush Patel Thru. His Mother Namely Nisha Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Kumar Bajpai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶1Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Bajpai, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5.

¶2The present petition has been filed seeking direction to respondent nos. 4 and 5 to change petitioner's name in their educational records.

¶3The facts in brief giving rise to the petition are that the petitioner whose name as recorded in the educational records is Aradhy Patel and he wanted to change his name to Ayush Patel and, as such, took steps for getting the same corrected. In the 8th Class Examination, the name of the petitioner was recorded as Aradhy Patel, he took the examination in the year 2024 and thereafter completed his 8th Standard.

¶4With intention to change his name from Aradhy Patel to Ayush Patel, the petitioner moved an appropriate application to Aadhar authorities and in terms of the said application, the name was changed from Aradhy Patel to Ayush Patel in Aadhar Card and subsequently on his application, the name was changed in the petitioner's Bank Account also. On getting his name changed in Aadhar Card as well as in the Bank records representations were made by the petitioner before the authorities concerned, but no action was taken.

¶5Consequently, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition, seeking direction to the authorities concerned to change petitioner's name in his educational records.

¶6The counsel for the petitioner argues that right to change the name has been held is a facet of fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, as such, he argues that the respondents could not have denied the claim of the petitioner. He further argues that the ground of limitation as taken by the respondents while passing the impugned order is wholly unjustified. He draws my attention to the judgment of this Court in the case of Anand Singh vs. State of U.P. (supra) wherein this court while interpreting the Regulation 7 of Chapter III came to the conclusion and recorded as under :- "The substantive part of Regulation 7 provides for the correction of such entries in the certificate which have arisen because of any inadvertent clerical mistake or omission in the records of the Board or the Institution last attended by the candidate. It also provides that for this purpose, the candidate has to submit an application within three years of the date of issue of the certificate. However, under the proviso, any spelling mistake occurring in the name of the applicant or in the name of the applicant's father/mother in the certificate can be corrected when an application is filed for this purpose. The nature of the error which is contemplated in the substantive part of Regulation 7 is not the same as contemplated in its proviso nor is any time limit set out in the proviso. It would be useful to examine the particulars of the candidate that are contained in a certificate issued by the Board. They include the year of the examination, the name of the candidate, the names of the parents, date of birth, subjects opted, division obtained, name of the School/Centre, certificate number, appearance as a regular/private candidate and the date of issue of the certificate. Of these, the date of birth, the subjects opted, the year of examination and the division obtained by the candidate are particulars which have an important bearing when admission to higher classes or employment is sought by the candidate. While making any correction in the entries relating to these matters, the requirement of moving the application within three years has to be adhered to as any correction in regard to these entries would have an impact on the rights of other candidates when they seek admission to higher classes or employment. However, the other particulars contained in the certificate, like the name of the candidate or the names of the parents of the candidate are not that relevant and any correction made in regard to these particulars would have no impact on the admission or employment of other candidates. When so considered, we feel persuaded to hold that the time limit of three years prescribed in the substantive part of Regulation 7 for submission of an application for making correction in the certificate issued by the Board in regard to the name of the candidate or the names of the parents of the candidate should not be insisted upon, particularly when the Board itself has considered it appropriate to have no time limit under the proviso for making correction in regard to any spelling mistake in the name of the candidate or his parents. The applicant must, however, explain to the Board the reasons on the basis of which the application could not be submitted earlier and if it is found that the claim is bona fide and is otherwise justified, there is no reason to reject the application, as in the present case, merely on the ground of delay. Undoubtedly, the Board has to examine whether any genuine ground has been made out for correcting the name and it would be open to the Board to consider all the relevant materials pertaining to the request for correction of the name. "

¶7The counsel for the petitioner has further drawn attention of this Court to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (Minor) vs. CBSE and others [Civil Appeal No.3905 of 2011 decided on 03.06.2021] wherein the Apex Court considered the various judgments of the various High Courts and recorded as under : "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 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.

¶172In 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."

¶8In the light of the judgment in the cases of Kabir Jaiswal and Jigya Yadav (supra), it is now clearly well settled that right to change the name is a facet of fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India and cannot be denied. The said right can be exercised in the manner prescribed in the directions as contained in paragraph 171 and 172 of the judgment of Jigya Yadav (supra), as recorded above.

¶9In the present case, the prayer made by the petitioner is covered by the law laid down by this Court in the case of Anand Singh vs. U.P. Board of Secondary Education (supra).

¶10In view of the law as laid down and discussed above, the inaction by the respondents denying the petitioner's right to change his name clearly violates his rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner (though his guardian) is directed to move an appropriate application afresh along with a copy of this order and the documents including the Aadhar Card and the Bank account details before the respondent no.5 along with the original certificate and mark-sheet of Class 8th. On receiving such application, the respondent no.5 is directed to carry out the desired change of name in the mark-sheet and Transfer Certificate. However, it is clarified that in the fresh transfer certificate and mark-sheet issued to the petitioner, it would contain the name 'Ayush Patel'. The said exercise shall be completed by the respondent no.5 within six weeks from the date of filing of the application. The petitioner shall thereupon be entitled to file the application before the respondents no. 4 along with original records who shall also make the necessary corrections in the educational certificates/records issued to the petitioner in the light of the said fresh certificate issued to the respondent no.2. It is further directed that the respondent no.2 shall carry out the necessary corrections in the 9th Class educational records of the petitioner also which shall be in consonance with the name change, as recorded in the fresh Transfer Certificate in terms of the directions given above.

¶11With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 5.7.2024 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench