Patna High Court
Hamzah HassanversusThe Chairman, Central Board of Secondary Education (C.B.S.E.)
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that CBSE must correct the petitioner’s date of birth in its certificates in accordance with the public documents, notwithstanding the Board’s bye‑law time‑limit, as the public documents have a statutory presumption of correctness.
Summary
The petitioner, Hamzah Hassan, discovered that his CBSE school certificates recorded his date of birth as 07‑08‑2001, whereas his birth certificate and passport show 20‑12‑1999. He filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing CBSE to correct the date of birth in his matriculation certificate and marksheet. The CBSE argued that its examination bye‑laws prohibit corrections after the examination and that the petition was time‑barred. The Court examined the Supreme Court’s decision in Jigya Yadav (2021) 7 SCC 535, which held that public documents such as birth certificates and passports have a statutory presumption of correctness and must be considered for corrections, and also considered the Delhi High Court’s decision in Central Board of Secondary Education v. Prema Evelyn D Cruz. Relying on these precedents, the Court held that the Board is obligated to amend the certificate to reflect the correct date of birth despite the bye‑law limitation. Consequently, the Court directed the Regional Officer of CBSE to process the correction and issue a fresh certificate within ten weeks. The writ petition was allowed and each party bears its own costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the CBSE Examination Bye‑laws have the force of law and can restrict correction of certificates.
- Whether the Bye‑laws unreasonably restrict the right to identity under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the Board is obliged to correct certificates based on public documents that carry a statutory presumption of correctness.
- Whether the timing of the correction application (post‑examination and after a long lapse) is a valid ground for denial.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued notwithstanding the explicit provisions of the Bye‑laws.
Subjects
- date of birth correction
- CBSE
- writ petition
- mandamus
- identity right
- public documents
- statutory presumption
- examination bye‑laws
- certificate amendment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11145 of 2025
======================================================
Hamzah Hassan Son of Dr. Mohammad Shahid Hassan Resident of village
Houe No.- 129-D, Patliputra Colony, P.S.- Patliputra Colony, District- Patna,
Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Chairman, Central Board of Secondary Education (C.B.S.E.) Shiksha
Kendra, 2- Community Centre, Preet Vihar, New Delhi- 110092.
2. The Controller of Examinations, Central Board of Secondary Education
(C.B.S.E.), Shiksha Kendra, Preet Vihar, New Delhi- 110092.
3. The Regional Officer, Central Board of Secondary Education (C.B.S.E.),
Regional Office, Patna, Bihar.
4. The Principal, Vishashvi Public School, NH- 30A, Fatuha, Patna, Bihar-
803201.
5. The Principal, International School, New Patliputra Colony, Patna, Bihar-
800013.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vatsal Verma, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Krishna Tripthy, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 12-01-2026
Heard Mr. Vatsal Verma, the learned Advocate for the
petitioner and Mr. Vinay Krishna Tripathy, the learned Advocate
for the Central Board of Secondary Education (for short ‘the
CBSE’).
2. The petitioner by invoking the extraordinary writ
jurisdiction of this Court is seeking a direction upon the
concerned respondent authorities, especially the authority of the
CBSE to make necessary correction in the date of birth of the
petitioner in the records of the school as well as the records of
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
2/15
CBSE, including the matriculation certificate and the marksheet
and other certificates from 07.08.2001 to 20.12.1999, in
accordance with valid and official records of the petitioner.
3. Briefly stated, the petitioner was born on
20.12.1999 at Kurji Holy Family Hospital, Patna, whereupon a
certificate of birth was issued to the parents of the petitioner by
the hospital bearing Registration No. 3794/99 and IP No.
15269/99. Based upon which, birth certificate was also issued
by the Municipal Authorities on 08.02.2000 to the parents of the
petitioner. In the afore-noted certificate, the date of birth of the
petitioner was duly recorded on 20.12.1999. Subsequently to the
birth of the petitioner, the parents of the petitioner applied for
his passport and, accordingly, a passport was issued in the name
of the petitioner, the copy of which is also placed on record as
Annexure-P/3 (series). Time to time upon expiry of the validity
period of passport, the same was renewed and in all the places,
the date of birth of the petitioner was duly mentioned as
20.12.1999. Subsequently, when the petitioner was admitted in
the school and when he took admission in class-VIII in
Vishashvi Public School, Patna, on account of inadvertent
mistake, either by the authorities of the school or his parents, the
date of birth was erroneously recorded as 07.08.2001. At the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
3/15
relevant point of time, the petitioner was only about 13 years.
On account of the aforesaid mistake, a similar mistake was also
committed at the time of submission of the Form, based upon
which the registration was made and the admit card was issued.
The petitioner appeared and successfully completed his All
India Secondary School Examination (Class-X) in the year
2016. Subsequently after completing matriculation, the
petitioner also completed his Senior School Certificate
Examination (Class-XII) in the year 2018 from International
School New Patliputra Colony, Patna. The petitioner also got
enrolled as a student of Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) in
Buddha Institute of Medical Science and at present pursuing the
said course.
4. It is the contention of the petitioner that for the first
time, he came to know in May, 2025 when he tried to renew his
passport that two different date of births have been recorded in
his documents, inasmuch as in his passport, his date of birth has
been mentioned as 20.12.1999 whereas in his school certificate
it is mentioned as 07.08.2001.
5. Referring to the documents placed on record,
especially the passport as well as the birth certificate issued by
the Municipal Corporation, Mr. Vatsal Verma, learned Advocate
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
4/15
for the petitioner, submitted that the correct date of birth of the
petitioner was 20.12.1999, but on account of sheer mistake,
while he was admitted in Class-VIII, some error has cropped up
in filling the date of birth; thus, for rectification of the same, the
petitioner approached the authorities of the CBSE and made
correspondences with a request to make necessary correction in
the date of birth. However, no action was taken. Hence the
present petition.
6. Heavy reliance has been placed on a decision
rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (Minor)
(Through Guardian/Father Hari Singh) v. Central Board of
Secondary Education & Ors. [(2021) 7 SCC 535]. Referring
to the mandate of the Apex Court, it is contended that there is no
bar in making necessary correction in the date of birth of a
candidate if the same is supported with public documents. In the
case at hand, the petitioner is armed with public documents
including the birth certificate duly issued way back in the year
2000, besides the passport which was issued by the Passport
Office upon proper verification of the documents duly submitted
and requisite form which was filled up by his parents in the year
2000 itself. The validity of the documents are not in question;
albeit, the authorities of the CBSE are not persuaded with the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
5/15
request of the petitioner.
7. While concluding his argument(s), it is further
urged that in the light of above referred ruling and mandate of
the Apex Court, the learned Division Bench of the High Court at
New Delhi, in the case of Central Board of Secondary
Education v. Prema Evelyn D Cruz & Anr. [LPA 171/2023 &
CM APPL. 11492/2023 (additional documents) while
affirming the order of the learned Single Judge of the High
Court has been pleased to direct for necessary correction of the
date of birth of a candidate taking note of the passport and other
documents, which is considered to be as a valid proof of date of
birth. The Court further clarified that if the CBSE record is at
variance with the Passport, it could lead to the creation of
considerable doubt in the minds of any person who is
considering the candidature of a candidate for employment,
immigration or for any other purpose.
8. Mr. Vinay Krishna Tripathi, learned Advocate for
the CBSE, refuting the contention of the learned Advocate for
the petitioner submitted that to correct typographical and other
errors to make the certificate consistent with the school records
can be made provided that corrections in the school records
should not have been made after the submission of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
6/15
application form for admission to examination of the Board. In
the case at hand, the date of birth of the petitioner has been
incorporated in the matriculation certificate as well as marksheet
based upon the school records, wherein the date of birth of the
petitioner was duly entered as 07.08.2001. It is further
contended that the application for correction of the date of birth
is not worth being entertained as no change in the date of birth
once recorded in the Board’s record shall be made. The
petitioner having passed his examination in the year 2016 has
approached the Board for changing his date of birth after 9 years
and thus in terms with the By-laws of the CBSE, the same is not
permissible. Moreover, the application of the petitioner has been
rejected being time barred and communicated vide letter dated
28.07.2025, and the same is not challenged till date.
9. Before proceeding further, it would be relevant to
take note of the decision rendered by the three Judges Bench of
the Apex Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (supra); the core
issue was related to correction/change in the name/surname/date
of birth of the candidates or their parents in the certificate issued
by the CBSE Board. The Apex Court having gone through the
elaborate set of submissions and documents on record in the
respective matter, categorize the points for consideration, which
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
7/15
are as follows:
“104.1. (1) Whether the CBSE Examination
Bye-laws have the force of law?
104.2. (2) Whether Examination Bye-laws
impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of
rights under Article 19 of the Constitution
including fail the test of rationality for excessively
restricting the scope of permissible
corrections/changes?
104.3. (3) Whether the 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?
104.4. (4) Whether the Examination Bye-
laws 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?
104.5. (5) Whether writ of mandamus issued
for effecting corrections in CBSE certificates can
be in the teeth of explicit provisions in the
Examination Bye-laws, without examining validity
of the bye-laws?
10. The Court while answering the issue as to whether
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
8/15
a person's right to control the elements of identity can be denied
by CBSE on the basis of its Bye-laws, which are meant to
regulate and prescribe the procedure for such corrections, has
held that the right to identity is protected under Articles 19 and
21 of the Constitution encompassing an individual's control over
their name and identity. The CBSE Bye-laws restricting
corrections or changes in certificate must be judged, on
reasonableness, considering their impact on a student's,
legitimate objectives and rational classification. The CBSE is
obliged to allow corrections consistent with the school records
without imposing precondition, except a reasonable limitation
period tied to the duration of record preservation. Any embargo
on name change before publication of result was deemed
unreasonable, though CBSE may reject request where records
are no longer traceable. For changes not consistent with the
school records, if supported by public documents, CBSE must
accept them subject to reasonable restrictions; however, where
the change is based on a newly acquired name without
supporting documents, it may be allowed only upon Court
declaration, gazette publication, return of original certificate and
payment of prescribed fees.
11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court clearly set out and
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
9/15
dealt with the utility and importance of CBSE certificate by
holding as follows:-
“144. The utility of certificates issued by the
Board is not confined to educational purposes
anymore. They serve a social purpose today and are
often used to cross verify particulars like name and
date of birth while applying for other government
identity documents. They assume immense
relevance while applying for various jobs, both
public and private. Interestingly, CBSE itself has
argued at length on the importance and
authoritative value of their certificates. In such
circumstances, an inaccuracy or denial of change
could be fatal to a student's future prospects and all
these concerns cannot be brushed aside in the name
of administrative exigencies.
xxx xxx xxx
150. No doubt, it is true that CBSE
certificates are not strictly meant to be considered
as identity documents, however, the same are being
relied upon for corroborative purposes in all
academic and career related transactions as
foundational document. In fact, the CBSE itself has
conceded to this fact that their certificates are relied
for all official purposes, as noted above. The date
of birth in matriculation certificate, in particular, is
relied upon as primary evidence of date of birth of
a citizen. Therefore, as regards the information
contained in a CBSE certificate, the Board must
afford opportunity to the students to modify it
subject to complying with requisite formalities
which are reasonable in nature. If all other State
agencies could allow it for the preservance of
consistency and accuracy, alongside being enablers
in free exercise of rights by the citizens, there is no
reason for the CBSE to not uphold that right of the
students. More so, it would be in the interest of
CBSE's own credibility that their records are
regarded as accurate and latest records of a student
worthy of being relied upon for official purposes.
Therefore, this approach would serve twin purposes
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
10/15
—
enabling free exercise of rights and preservance of
accuracy.”
12. Emphasizing the importance of the CBSE
certificate, the Apex Court examined the various broad points,
inter alia, whether the Board is obliged to carry out corrections/
changes in the certificate issued by it owing to corrections/
updation of publication records/documents which have statutory
presumption of genuineness?
13. The afore-noted point was duly answered in para
no.167 onward of the said decision, where the Court in no
uncertain terms taking note of the earlier decisions, has
observed that the records maintained by the statutory authorities
have a presumption of correctness in their favor and they would
prevail over any entry made in the school register held that there
is no difficulty in correcting CBSE record to bring it in
conformity with the school record. However, the difficulty
arises when a statutory document is not consistent with the
school record; in such a situation, the version supported by the
statutory documents could be reckoned for the purpose of
correction in CBSE certificate to make it consistent with public
documents.
14. Upon careful perusal of the observations made in
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
11/15
the case of Jigya Yadav (supra), there is no doubt that the Board
is expected to take due notice of such statutory public
documents and effect consequential corrections in the records
after completing the necessary formalities as mandated.
15. While answering the issues as set forth, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court finally concluded in para-194 to 194.1
as follows:-
“194. 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.
“194.1. 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
12/15
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).
16. Upon careful reading of the decisions rendered
by the Apex Court in the case of Jigya Yadav (supra), it is
manifest that based upon the public documents like birth
certificate, Aadhar card, election card etc., the change in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
13/15
CBSE certificate can be incorporated in consistent therewith.
17. The reliance on a decision placed by the learned
Advocate for the petitioner on a Division Bench decision of the
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in the case of Prema Evelyn
D Cruz (supra) also strengthen the case of the petitioner,
wherein the Court while affirming the decision passed by the
learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi has been
pleased to hold that the citizen of this country is entitled to a
true and correct narration of all necessary and relevant
particulars in the public document that pertain to them. The
CBSE is a record keeper of considerable importance, as has
been elaborated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav
(supra). The matriculation certificate of a person is considered
an unassailable proof of date of birth. The Court further noted
that a passport among certain other documents is also
considered as a valid proof of date of birth and if the CBSE
record is at variance with the passport, it could lead a creation of
considerable doubt in the minds of any person who is
considering the case of such person for employment,
immigration or for any other purpose.
18. Now coming to the case at hand, indubitably the
petitioner is armed with a passport duly issued and furnished
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
14/15
long back in the year 2000, wherein the date of birth of the
petitioner has been categorically mentioned as 20.12.1999. The
passport issued in favor of the petitioner was duly prepared after
due verification and based upon the birth certificate issued by
the Municipal Authority which also validate the submission of
the petitioner admitting his date of birth as 20.12.1999.
19. The afore-noted public documents carry
authenticity and it would prevail over the entry made in the
school register unless it is controverted by other public
documents or proved otherwise. If the entry of the date of birth
in the certificate or marksheet does not tally with that in the
birth certificate issued by the statutory authority as well as in the
other document, including the passport, the petitioner would
have to face serious hardship and thus it has rightly been
observed by the learned High Court of Delhi that failure to
exercise jurisdiction will result in injustice to the aggrieved.
20. In view of the aforesaid facts, circumstances and
the position obtaining in law, this Court finds substance in the
present writ petition and accordingly directs the respondent no.3
to process the application for correction of date of birth of the
petitioner in the certificate(s) issued by it after getting it
properly corrected by the school and further issue a fresh
Patna High Court CWJC No.11145 of 2025 dt.12-01-2026
15/15
certificate by making necessary corrections in the date of birth
of the petitioner from 07.08.2001 to 20.12.1999 within a period
of ten weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of
this order, in terms with the mandate of the Apex Court rendered
in Jigya Yadav (supra).
21. The writ petition stands allowed.
22. The parties shall bear their own cost(s).
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 15.01.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…