← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/7099/2024dismissed

Md. Hasan Nawaz v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-15Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7099 of 2024 ====================================================== Md. Hasan Nawaz Son of Md. Fazlur. Rahman @ Shaik Fazlur Rahman, Resident of Village- Hamathpur, P.O.- Balia belown, P.S.- Kadwa, DistrictKatihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Bihar School Examination Board Patna.

3.

Chairman Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 4.

Secretary Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Obaidur Rahman For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader (14) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties concerned.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for correction of his date of birth in the matriculation certificate, wherein, instead of 15.07.1968, the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned as 15.07.1965.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner passed the matriculation examination in the year 1984, having Roll Code 4312 and Roll No. 101, securing first division. The registration of the petitioner was done with the Board in the year 1983 and in the registration slip the date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 15.07.1968. In the Admit Card issued by the Bihar School Examination Board,

Patna High Court CWJC No.7099 of 2024(2) dt.15-04-2025 2/3 Patna, the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned as 15.07.1968. The petitioner passed with first division and his certificate was issued after four years of his passing the examination. In the school leaving certificate the date of birth has been mentioned as 15.07.1968, but in the original certificate the date of birth as been mentioned as 15.07.1965. Thereafter, pursuant to the notice published by the Board in the year 1999 and 2000, the petitioner filed a representation for correction of his date of birth, which is still pending.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel of the Bihar School Examination Board submits that matriculation certificate was issued to the petitioner in the year 1984, which would be evident from Annexure-P/4, and at that point of time the petitioner did not take any step for correction of his date of birth. Subsequently, according to the petitioner, he submitted a representation for correction of his date of birth in the year 1999, but after submission of his representation the petitioner again did not take any step and filed the present writ application after lapse of about 25 years. The writ application has been filed by the petitioner after much delay and at this late stage the correction of date of birth may not be directed by this Court.

5. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and

Patna High Court CWJC No.7099 of 2024(2) dt.15-04-2025 3/3 considering the fact it appears that the petitioner did not take any step for correction of his date of birth just after receipt of his matriculation certificate having incorrect date of birth and in the opinion of this Court, 2 to 3 years time is sufficient to take necessary steps for correction of incorrect date of birth in the certificate.

6. Even after submitting representation pursuant to the notice published by the Board in the year 1999/2000, the petitioner did not pursue his representation and did not take any step for filing writ petition and after lapse of about 25 years the petitioner has filed the present writ application seeking correction in the date of birth.

7. Admittedly, the petitioner passed matriculation examination in the year 1984, for which, the certificate was issued in 1984 itself. The correction of date of birth, as mentioned in the certificate, cannot be allowed after lapse of about 41 years.

8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed having no merit.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ashwani/- U