P.Sivagnaesh v. The Joint Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.No.54141 of 2025 P.Sivaganesh ... Petitioner Vs 1.

The Joint Director, Directorate of Government Examinations, College Road, DPI Campus, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006.

2.

The Chief Educational Officer, Directorate of School Education, Kamarajar Complex, 100 ft. Road, Ellaipillaichavady, Near Indira Gandhi Statue, Pondicherry.

3.

The Joint Director, Directorate of School Education, Kamarajar Complex, 100 ft. Road, Ellaipillaichavady, Near Indira Gandhi Statue, Pondicherry.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent pertaining to the proceedings dated 20.03.2025 in R.C.No. 203390/B5(1)/2025 and quash the same and consequentially direct the first respondent to carry out the corrections in SSLC and Higher Secondary Certificates of the petitioner.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Karthik Raja For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.Prabakaran Government Advocate

ORDER

The prayer in the writ petition is for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the first respondent relating to the order dated 20.03.2025 in R.C.No. 203390/B5(1)/2025, quashing the same and consequently directing the first respondent to carry out correction in the SSLC and Higher Secondary certificates of the petitioner.

2. Upon perusing the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the material records of the case and upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the grievance of the petitioner is that his date of birth is 30.11.1985. The birth certificate issued by the concerned local authority, namely the Puducherry Municipality, also clearly mentions the date of birth as 30.11.1985. However, while furnishing the date of birth to the school education authorities, by way of a typographical error, it was mentioned as 30.10.1985 instead of 30.11.1985. When the petitioner subsequently approached the authorities to correct the said error, the same was rejected. The learned counsel would submit that the petitioner intends to apply for visas and travel to other jurisdictions for his livelihood and if different dates of birth are 2/6

mentioned in the birth certificate and the educational certificates, it would be very difficult for the petitioner to obtain any visa.

3. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 would submit that Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu Secondary School Leaving Certificate Scheme categorically provides that an application seeking change of date of birth shall not be entertained after the person has completed the school course and appeared for the public examination and therefore the authorities presently have no jurisdiction whatsoever to correct the date of birth.

4. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

5. It is true that Rule 5 restricts the power of the authorities to correct the date of birth after completion of the course. At the same time, this is a case where, by way of a typographical error, the month has been wrongly mentioned as October instead of November. Even by taking the corrected date of birth, the petitioner does not gain any undue benefit nor he is in any Government service. The only difficulty faced by the petitioner is in applying for visas, as different dates of birth in the birth certificate and educational 3/6

certificates would create serious problems. Persons like the petitioner travel abroad to earn their livelihood and earn foreign exchange for the country. Therefore, the law must lean in favour of correcting such a mistake and also to help the persons like the petitioner. This is an extraordinary case where this Court can come to the aid of the petitioner in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms:- (i) The first respondent is directed to carry out the alteration of the date of birth in SSLC and Higher Secondary Certificates issued to the petitioner, either by scoring out the existing date of birth and making an endorsement with signature or by issuing fresh certificates. (ii) This exercise shall be carried out within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a web copy of this order, without waiting for the certified copy.

(iii) Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 15.12.2025 nsl To 4/6

1.

The Joint Director, Directorate of Government Examinations, College Road, DPI Campus, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006.

2.

The Chief Educational Officer, Directorate of School Education, Kamarajar Complex, 100 ft. Road, Ellaipillaichavady, Near Indira Gandhi Statue, Pondicherry.

3.

The Joint Director, Directorate of School Education, Kamarajar Complex, 100 ft. Road, Ellaipillaichavady, Near Indira Gandhi Statue, Pondicherry.

5/6

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

nsl W.P.No. 48485 of 2025 15.12.2025 6/6