AMIT KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB SCHOOL EDUCATION BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard through video conferencing.

(2.) The present civil writ petition has been filed challenging the order/letter dated 20.03.2018 (Annexure P-9) whereby the petitioner's request for change in his date of birth in school certificates has been rejected and the fee deposited by him for this purpose has been forfeited.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that though the birth certificate of the petitioner (Annexure P-1) records his date of birth as 22.09.1987, the middle and matriculation certificates issued by respondent No.1 (Annexures P-2 and P-3) record his date of birth as 22.09.1983. It is contended that in 2017 the petitioner discovered that his date of birth was wrongly mentioned as 22.09.1983 in the certificates Annexures P-2 and P- 3. The petitioner approached his school with his birth certificate Annexure P-1 and on that basis the correction in his date of birth was carried out by the school in it's Admission and Withdrawal Register (Annexure P-4) and his date of birth therein was corrected from 22.09.1983 to 22.09.1987. The school vide an undated letter (Annexure P-5) also recommended to the respondents for correcting the date of birth of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner deposited the fee of Rs.12,700/- with respondent No.2 and submitted an application (Annexure P-7) for the respondents to correct his date of birth. Vide letter dated 29.10.2018 (Annexure P-8) respondent No.2 got the original birth certificate of the petitioner verified and sent it to respondent No.1 for further action. Vide impugned order/letter dated 20.03.2018 (Annexure P-9) respondent No.1 rejected the petitioner's request for change in his date of birth in school certificates from 22.09.1983 (incorrectly typed as 22.09.1993 in the order/letter) to 22.09.1987. In the impugned order/letter (Annexure P-9) it was mentioned that as per the Rules, the age for taking the middle exams is required to be 12 years by 31st December of the year and if the date of birth is corrected then the petitioner's age at that time would be around 9 years and, therefore, as per Order No.279 dated 19.01.2018 of Deputy Director (Schools) the case of the petitioner stood rejected. It was also mentioned that as per the Rules, the fees could not be refunded.