ADITYA SHAHAJI FAVADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the decision of second respondent dated 13.3.2008 and for quashing and setting aside the communication issued by the 4th respondent dated 1.2.2008. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to carry out the necessary corrections in the date of birth of the petitioner in the school leaving certificate. The petitioner has prayed for certain ad-interim relief to which it is not necessary for us to advert to at this stage. In the light of the limited relief which the petitioner has sought for in this petition, we deem it appropriate to decide this petition finally at the stage of admission.

(3.) The petitioner was born on 15.4.1990 but unfortunately when the certificate came to be issued the date of birth of the petitioner was written as 15.4.1991 instead of 15.4.1990. The aforesaid mistake was not noticed by the parents of the petitioner when the petitioner was admitted in the school. The aforesaid mistake went unnoticed and the date of birth of the petitioner came to be recorded in the school register as 15.4.1991. Unfortunately, this mistake also was not noticed when the petitioner applied for admission to First Year B.A.M.S.Course. Subsequently when it was brought to the notice of the petitioner that the petitioner would not be permitted to appear for the examination which are scheduled to be held in November, 2008 as the petitioner was under age at the time of admission to First Year B.A.M.S.Course, efforts were undertaken by the parents of the petitioner for correcting the date of birth from 15.4.1991 to 15.4.1990. By communication of the second respondent, dated 13.3.2008, the Education Officer i.e. respondent No.2 informed the Principal of the school from where the petitioner had passed out that the respondent No.2 could not carry out the necessary correction as the petitioner had already passed out from the school. Meanwhile, the petitioner was in receipt of the communication dated 1.2.2008 informing the Principal, Siddhakala Ayurved Mahavidyalaya , Sangamner, District Ahmednagar where the petitioner had been granted admission to First Year B.A.M.S.Course that the petitioner was not eligible for appearing for the examination scheduled to be held in November, 2008 as the petitioner was underage when the petitioner had been admitted to the aforesaid course.