Evilin Priskilarani vs State Of Karnataka & Ors.

“I) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondent authorities to consider and effect appropriate corrections in the Petitioner’s school records maintained by Respondent No.5, by correcting her name from “Evlan Priskilarani” to “Evilin Priskilarani” and her permanent residential address to Bhutpur Village, Bhutpur, Sedam Taluk, Kalaburagi District, Karnataka-585 222, on the basis of the supporting documents and in accordance with law;

II) In the alternative, direct the competent Respondent authorities to reconsider the Petitioner’s application dated 03.09.2026, vide Annexure-J independently examine the documentary evidence and pass a reasoned order within a time-bound period, having regard to the recruitment deadline of 28.10.2026;

III) Grant liberty to the Petitioner to institute appropriate civil proceedings before the competent civil court for declaration and consequential relief, if required, and make any interim arrangement subject to the final outcome of such proceedings; and

IV) Pass such other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity.”

“3.

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner joined respondent No.2 – Tiny Angles English Primary School on 19.11.2009 for Class-I and studied in the said School upto Class-VIII, subsequent to which, petitioner joined respondent No.3 – Royal Public School for Class – IX and is currently studying in Class – X in the respondent No.3 –School. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that though his father's name is actually ‘Vempati Chinna Kasaiah’ as indicated in the Birth Certificate, Aadhar Card and other public documents, due to oversight and inadvertence, the petitioner had erroneously given the name of his father as ‘V. Keshavalu’ in the school records of respondent No.2 School as well as the school records of respondent No.3 – School. It is contented that in view of petitioner’s representation, the respondent No.2 vide its letter dated 10.12.2024 addressed to respondent No.1 sought correction of petitioner’s father's name from ‘V. Keshavalu’ to ‘Vempati Chinna Kasaiah’, pursuant to which, respondent No.1 has issued the impugned endorsement directing the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court thereby rejecting the request of the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of the present petition. In support of his contention, petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (minor)(Through Guardian / Father Hari Singh) Vs. C.B.S.E. (Central Board of Secondary Education) and others – AIR 2021 SC 4775.

4.

Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5 would support the impugned endorsement and submit that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

5.

A perusal of the material on record comprising of the Birth Certificate, Aadhar Card, Pan Card, Bank pass book, etc., will clearly indicate that the name of the petitioner's father is actually ‘Vempati Chinna Kasaiah’ and not ‘V. Keshavalu’ as erroneously / incorrectly entered at the time of the petitioner’s securing admission to respondent No.2 – School for Class – I and to respondent No.3 – school for Class No.IX, which was reflected in the school records. In fact, a perusal of the letter at Annexure – J dated 10.12.2024 will clearly indicate that the 2nd respondent's school themselves acknowledged the fact that the petitioner's father's name was wrongly entered in their records as V. Keshavalu and requested the 1st respondent – BEO to carry out necessary corrections in the records maintained by respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5.

6.

The cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the undisputed public documents of impeccable and sterling quality, is sufficient to come to the conclusion that the name of the petitioner's father is actually ‘Vempati Chinna Kasaiah’ and not ‘V. Keshavalu’ which has been erroneously / incorrectly entered in the school records of respondent Nos.2 and 3 by the petitioner at the time of obtaining admission. In the case of Jigya, the Apex Court at para 171 has held 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."

7.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the 1st respondent clearly fell in error in failing to appreciate that there was absolutely no dispute whatsoever as to the actual name of the of the petitioner's father, which was actually ‘Vempati Chinna Kasaiah’ and not ‘V. Keshavalu’ and consequently, the question of the petitioner being directed to approach the competent Civil Court by filing a suit and obtaining a declaration would not arise in the facts and circumstances of the instant case and as such, the impugned endorsement issued by the 1st respondent at Annexure – A dated 18.12.2024 deserves to be quashed and necessary directions are to be issued to respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 5.”

ORDER