Heena Patel v. Union Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4871 OF 2021 • Heena Patel, D/o Damodar Prasad Patel, aged about 20 years, R/o Village Jaimura, Tehsil Kharisya, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1.

Union of India, through Ministry of Education and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Room No.348 A Wing, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi 110011.

2.

Central Board of Secondary Education, Shiksha Kendra to Community Centre, Preet Vihar, Delhi 110092.

3.

Principal, D. A. V. Public School, Neharpali, Tehsil Kharisya, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Kamal Kishore Patel, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1 :

Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate.

For Respondents No.2 :

Mr. T.K. Tiwari, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board [07/12/2021] 1.

Grievance of the Petitioner seems to be the error in respect of the name of her father in the Mark-Sheet of 10th Class issued to the Petitioner by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). 2.

According to learned Counsel for Petitioner, the name of the father of the Petitioner in the Mark-Sheet of 10th Class has been reflected as "Damodar Patel" and in the Mark-Sheet of 12th Class the same has been reflected as "Damodar Prasad Patel" and this discrepancy is coming in the way of the Petitioner in taking admission in the Medical College. That, the Petitioner has been called for counselling for admission in the Medical College and she apprehends that her father's name which has been reflected differently in the aforesaid two Mark-Sheets would come in her way.

3.

Learned Counsels appearing for the Respondents, however, submits that it appears that the Petitioner has only recently made a request to the Principal of the School from where she has cleared her study and immediately thereafter she has approached the Court also for the same relief and in any case the matter has to be forwarded by the concerned School to the Office of the Respondent No.2 enabling them to conduct an enquiry and to pass an order.

4.

Given the submissions made by learned Counsels appearing for the parties and also taking into consideration the pleadings enclosed along with the Writ Petition, the present Writ Petition as of now is disposed of directing the Respondent No.3 to consider the Annexure P-1 which has been made by the Petitioner, and after due verification of the facts from the records available in the School make necessary proposal and recommendation to Respondent No.2 who in turn shall also conduct an enquiry and shall pass appropriate orders in this regard. Let this exercise be concluded by Respondents No.2 & 3 within a period of three months. 5.

Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge