NDLI: Jigya Yadav (minor) (through Guardian/father Hari Singh) Vs. C.b.s.e. (central Board of Secondary Education) & Ors

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Others
Headnote	Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) – Examination Byelaws of the Board, if having the force of law – Held: The CBSE Examination Byelaws are couched in the form of a code – They provide for all essential aspects relating to formal education of a student including admission, examination, migration, transfer, curriculum, fee for various services, issuance of verified certificates, modifications in certificates etc. – The Byelaws, therefore, bind the parties and are duly enforceable in a court of law, even by way of writ remedies – The Byelaws of the Board have the force of law and must be regarded as such for all legal purposes – It would serve no meaningful purpose to hold these authoritative set of rules originating from an instrumentality of the State as mere contractual terms despite there being overwhelming public interest in their just application – Arguendo, the Examination Byelaws are not “law” under Art.13, it would not affect the power of the Court to scrutinize them in reference to Part-III of the Constitution of India as CBSE is “State” within the meaning of Art.12 and all its actions are consequently subject to Part-III – Constitution of India – Part III – Arts. 12 and 13 – Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Examination Byelaws of 2007. Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) – Correction/change in certificates issued by the Board – Scope of permissible corrections/ changes – The CBSE Examination Byelaws restrict, both qualitatively and quantitatively, the corrections/changes that can be carried out in the certificates issued by the Board – Test of rationality – Whether Examination Byelaws of CBSE / Board impose reasonable restrictions – Held: The identity of an individual is one of the most closely guarded areas of the constitutional scheme in India – Name can be regarded as one of the foremost indicators of identity – Going by the very nature of rights under Article 19, the right to get changed name recorded in the official (public) records cannot be an absolute right and as a matter of public policy and larger public interest calls for certain reasonable restrictions to observe consistency and obviate confusion and deceptive attempt – On facts, the Byelaws permit change of name only if permission from the Court has been obtained prior to the publication of result – The provision is problematic on certain counts – There can be numerous circumstances wherein change of name could be a legitimate requirement and keeping the ultimate goal of preserving the standard of education in mind, the Board must provide for a reasonable opportunity to effect such changes – Balance of convenience would tilt in favour of students for, they stand to lose more due to inaccuracies in their certificates than the Board whose sole worry is increasing administrative burden – CBSE maintains its official records in respect of candidates on the basis of foundational documents being the school records – Therefore, CBSE is obliged to carry out all necessary corrections to ensure that CBSE certificate is consistent with the relevant information furnished in the school records as it existed at the relevant time and future changes thereto including after the publication of results by the CBSE – However, when it comes to recording any information in the original certificate issued by the CBSE which is not consistent with the school records, it is essential that the CBSE must insist for supporting public document which has presumptive value and in the given case declaration by a Court of law to incorporate such a change – In that regard, the CBSE can insist for additional conditions to reassure itself and safeguard its interest against any claim by a third party/ body because of changes incorporated by it pursuant to application made by the candidate – Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Examination Byelaws of 2007 – Constitution of India – Art.19. Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) – Correction/change in certificates issued by the Board – Whether the CBSE / Board is obliged to carry out corrections/changes in the certificates issued by it owing to correction/updation of public records/ documents which have statutory presumption of genuineness – Held: There is no reason for the CBSE Board to not take notice of the public documents relied upon by the candidate and to record change on that basis in the certificate issued by it, for being consistent with the relied upon public documents – It matters not if the information furnished in the public documents is not entirely consistent with the school records of the incumbent – CBSE while accepting those documents as foundational documents for effecting changes consistent therewith may insist for additional conditions and at the same time while retaining the original entry make note in the form of caption/ annotation in the fresh certificate to be issued by it while calling upon the incumbent to surrender the original certificate issued by it to avoid any misuse thereof at a later point of time – It would be permissible for the CBSE to insist for a sworn affidavit to be given by the incumbent making necessary declaration and also to indemnify the CBSE – The fresh certificate to be issued by the CBSE may also contain disclaimer of the Board clearly mentioning that change has been effected at the behest of the incumbent in light of the public documents relied upon by him – In addition, the incumbent can be called upon to notify about the change in the Official Gazette and by giving public notice as precondition for recording the change by way of abundant precaution – When a student applies to a Court of law for prior permission and/or declaration and produces public document(s), the Court would enter upon an inquiry wherein the legal presumption would operate in favour of the public document(s) and burden would shift on the party opposing the change to rebut the presumption or oppose the claim on any other ground – The question of genuineness of the document including its contents would be adjudicated in the same inquiry and the Court of law would permit the desired change only upon verifying the official records and upon being satisfied of its genuineness – At the same time, the question of justiciability of the requested changes would be considered and only upon being satisfied with the need demonstrated by the student, the Court would grant its permission – The said permission can then be placed before the Board along with copy of publication in the official gazette and requisite (prescribed) fee (if any) – The Board would then have no locus to make further enquiry nor would be required to enter upon any further verification exercise – While considering requests for changes in certificates, CBSE cannot act as a court and it cannot effectively consider any request over and above those requests that merely require bringing the certificates in conformity with the school records or public documents, as the case may be – Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Examination Byelaws of 2007. Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) – Examination Byelaws of the Board – Corrections/changes in certificates issued by the Board – Period of limitation for correction of the certificates – Whether the Examination Byelaws in force on the date of examination conducted by CBSE or the date of consideration of the application for recording correction/change would be relevant – And, whether the effect of correction or change, as the case may be, will have retrospective effect from the date of issue of the original certificate – Held: The Byelaws existing on the date of declaration/publication of result and issue of certificate would be relevant for the purpose of effecting changes in the certificates – If the limitation of applicability of Byelaws was to be reckoned from the date of application for correction/change and not the date of result of the examination conducted by CBSE, that would be leaving things to a state of uncertainty – Once changes are permitted in the documents of CBSE, it does not ipso facto mean that the changes are given a retrospective effect – The changes are indeed prospective and to signify that a remedial measure is provided in the Byelaws, as existing presently – They provide for the requirement of adding a caption/ annotation with the date of such change along with the changed particulars so as to indicate within the certificate that the changes have been made on a date subsequent to the date of publishing the certificates – The requirement of caption/annotation is indeed a sufficient safeguard to prevent the usage of subsequently altered documents as unchanged original records – Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Examination Byelaws of 2007.Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) – Correction/change in certificates issued by the Board – Whether writ of mandamus issued for effecting corrections in CBSE certificates can be in the teeth of explicit provisions in the examination byelaws, without examining validity of the byelaws – Held: The High Courts, being constitutional Courts, are duly vested with the power to review any law in light of Part-III – There cannot be mechanical directions by way of mandamus to a public authority without going into the veracity of the claims and without sufficiently explaining why the case demands extraordinary treatment – The Courts need to be extra cautious and alive to the immediate factual position before permitting changes – No two requests for change of name or change in date of birth can be viewed with the same judicial eye – Sometimes, change of name could be a necessity, sometimes it could be a pure exercise of freewill without any need – As long as Byelaws or the applicable rules permit so, there is no occasion for any court to deny such relief – But when Byelaws do not permit for the same, the Court must be circumspect before issuing directions, that too without commenting upon the validity of the Byelaws and without demonstrating the rights which are at stake – constitutional or legal – Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Examination Byelaws of 2007 – Constitution of India – Part III. Education/Educational Institutions: Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) – Correction/change in certificates issued by the Board – Nature of correction or change, as the case may be, permissible to be carried by the CBSE at the instance of the student including past student – Held: Broadly, two situations would arise – 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 – 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 – CBSE cannot impose precondition of applying for correction consistent with the school records only before publication of results – Such a condition would be unreasonable and excessive – However, if the request for recording change is based on changed school records post the publication of results and issue of certificate by the CBSE, the candidate would be entitled to apply for recording such a change within the reasonable limitation period prescribed by the CBSE – 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 – Reverting to the first category, 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 – 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 – 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 – Evidence Act, 1872 – ss.76 r/w ss.79, 80 and 81.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar
Neutral Citation	2021 INSC 303
Petitioner	Jigya Yadav (minor) (through Guardian/father Hari Singh)
Respondent	C.b.s.e. (central Board Of Secondary Education) & Ors
SCR	[2021] 4 S.C.R. 1100
Judgement Date	2021-06-03
Case Number	3905

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Jigya Yadav (minor) (through Guardian/father Hari Singh) Vs. C.b.s.e. (central Board of Secondary Education) & Ors

Please Log-in to view this content

Minor Sunil Oraon Tr. Guardian and Ors. Vs. C.b.s.e. and Ors.

Regional Officer C.b.s.e. Vs. Ku. Sheena Peethambaran and Ors.

The Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr. Vs. T. K. Rangarajan and Ors.

Central Board of Secondary Education Vs. Ms. Vineeta Mahajan and Anr.

Kartar Singh (minor) Through Guardian Bachan Singh Vs. Surjan Singh (dead) and Ors.

Ayudh Upaskar Nirmani Kalyan Samiti, Kanpur Vs. Government of India and Ors.

Pyarelal Vs. Shubhendra Pilania (minor) Through Natural Guardian (father) Shri Pradeep Kumar Pilania & Ors.

Secretary, Selection Committee (mbbs) Vs. N. Anirudhan (minor) and Ors.

U.p.p.s.c., Through Its Chairman & Anr. Vs. Rahul Singh & Anr.

Jigya Yadav (minor) (through Guardian/father Hari Singh) Vs. C.b.s.e. (central Board of Secondary Education) & Ors

Jigya Yadav (minor) (through Guardian/father Hari Singh) Vs. C.b.s.e. (central Board of Secondary Education) & Ors

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Minor Sunil Oraon Tr. Guardian and Ors. Vs. C.b.s.e. and Ors.

Regional Officer C.b.s.e. Vs. Ku. Sheena Peethambaran and Ors.

The Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr. Vs. T. K. Rangarajan and Ors.

Central Board of Secondary Education Vs. Ms. Vineeta Mahajan and Anr.

Kartar Singh (minor) Through Guardian Bachan Singh Vs. Surjan Singh (dead) and Ors.

Ayudh Upaskar Nirmani Kalyan Samiti, Kanpur Vs. Government of India and Ors.

Pyarelal Vs. Shubhendra Pilania (minor) Through Natural Guardian (father) Shri Pradeep Kumar Pilania & Ors.

Secretary, Selection Committee (mbbs) Vs. N. Anirudhan (minor) and Ors.

U.p.p.s.c., Through Its Chairman & Anr. Vs. Rahul Singh & Anr.

Jigya Yadav (minor) (through Guardian/father Hari Singh) Vs. C.b.s.e. (central Board of Secondary Education) & Ors