Bombay High Court

ASIF MAGDUM PATHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The order rejecting the correction proposal on the ground that the petitioner is no longer a student is unsustainable; the correction must be considered on merits.

Summary

Petitioner Asif Magdum Pathan sought correction of his caste entry in a school record from ‘Chaparband’ to ‘Muslim’. After leaving the school, the headmaster forwarded his correction proposal to the Education Officer (Respondent No. 2), who rejected it on the ground that the petitioner was no longer a student. The petitioner challenged this order by filing a writ petition. The Court held that a student’s departure does not bar consideration of a correction request and that the proposal must be examined on its merits. Consequently, the order rejecting the correction was quashed, the petition was allowed, and the matter was remanded to the Education Officer to decide the proposal within four weeks after the petitioner’s appearance.

Issues considered

Whether a proposal for correction of a school record can be dismissed solely because the student has left the school
Whether the Education Officer is obligated to consider the correction request on its merits despite the petitioner’s departure

Subjects

school record correction
caste designation
right to education
administrative law
writ petition
correction of entry

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:39821-DB


                                                {1}                  39-wp-10741-2026

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               39 WRIT PETITION NO. 10741 OF 2026

                                       Asif Magdum Pathan
                                             VERSUS
                              The State Of Maharashtra And Another
                                                ...
              Mr. Ramchandra J. Nirmal, Advocate for the Petitioner
              Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for State
              Mr. Anup Nikam, Advocate for Respondent No. 2
                                              .......

                                     CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                                ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.


                                         DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026
              PER COURT :

              1.    By this petition, petitioner challenges the order dated 03.11.2025

              passed by Respondent No. 2 rejecting the proposal for correction in the

              school record in respect of his caste which is recorded as ‘Chaparband’

              instead of ‘Muslim’.


              2.    The Headmaster has sent proposal of the Petitioner for correction

              in the school record in respect of his caste to Respondent No. 2-

              Education Officer (Primary). The said proposal is disposed of by

              Respondent No. 2 on the ground that petitioner has already left the

              school, therefore, his proposal cannot be considered. Being aggrieved

              by said order, petitioner is before this Court.
                                       {2}                      39-wp-10741-2026

3.       Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner, learned AGP for State

and learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.


4.       It is settled legal position that even if the student has left the

school, his proposal for correction of entry in the school record, has to

be considered on merits. The impugned order rejecting the proposal of

petitioner on the ground that he is no more student of the School,

therefore, cannot be sustained.


5.       In the result, Writ Petition is allowed.


6.       Impugned order dated 03.112025 passed by Respondent No. 2 is

quashed and set aside.


7.       The       matter   is   remanded    back   to   Respondent   No.   2   for

consideration of proposal of the petitioner on merits and in the light of

decision in Janabai Himmatrao Thakur vs. The State of Maharashtra

and others; 2019(6) Mh.L.J. 769. Petitioner shall appear before the

Education Officer on 15/09/2026. Respondent No. 2 shall decide the

said proposal within a period of four weeks from the date of first

appearance of the petitioner.




(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)                      (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
Bhagyawant Punde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…