Bombay High Court
SHAIKH ARBAJ FAROOQUEversusTHE EDUCATION OFFICER PRIMARY AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
A headmaster cannot reject an application for correction in a primary school record but must forward it to the Education Officer as mandated by Regulation 26.4 of the Secondary School Code, 1977.
Summary
The petitioner sought correction of his primary school record, but the headmaster of the school rejected the application. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the rejection. The Court examined Regulation 26.4 of the Secondary School Code, 1977, which obliges a headmaster to forward such proposals to the Education Officer rather than reject them. Accordingly, the Court held that the headmaster’s refusal was unlawful and quashed the impugned order. The petition was allowed, directing the headmaster to forward the application within two weeks and directing the Education Officer to consider it on its merits, not to reject it merely because the petitioner is not currently studying at the school.
Issues considered
- Whether a headmaster may reject an application for correction of a primary school record under Regulation 26.4 of the Secondary School Code, 1977.
- Whether the Education Officer must consider the application on its merits and cannot reject it solely because the petitioner is not presently enrolled in the school.
Legislation cited
- Secondary School Code, 1977 — s. Regulation 26.4
Subjects
- school record correction
- writ petition
- education officer
- secondary school code
- administrative law
- Regulation 26.4
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43052-DB
1 68-WP-12228-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12228 OF 2026
SHAIKH ARBAJ FAROOQUE
VERSUS
THE EDUCATION OFFICER PRIMARY AND ANOTHER
...
Mr. Wajeed Ahmed Shaikh, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Yadav Lonikar, Advocate for Respondent No.1
...
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Application of the petitioner seeking correction in the
Primary School record is rejected by the Headmaster of respondent
No.2 School.
2. This Court has consistently taken a view that as per
Regulation 26.4 of the Secondary School Code, 1977, it is
imperative for the Headmaster to forward the proposal to Education
Officer instead of rejecting the same. Therefore, the impugned order
cannot be sustained.
3. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned
order dated 03/07/2026 is hereby quashed and set aside.
Respondent No.2 shall forward the application of the petitioner
dated 03/07/2026 to the Education Officer (Primary) within a period
of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The
SVH
2 68-WP-12228-26.odt
Education Officer shall consider the application of petitioner on it’s
own merits and in the light of decision in Janabai Himmatrao
Thakur vs. The State of Maharashtra and others [2019(6)
Mh.L.J. 769].
4. It is made clear that the Education Officer shall not
reject the said application only on the ground that the petitioner is
not taking education the said School presently.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
SVH
Checking your session…