Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9428 Court No. - 19 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11354 of 2024 Petitioner :- Utkarsh Kumar Respondent :- Secy., Central Board Of Secondary Education, Praygraj And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar Srivastava,Mahendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- Shashank Bhasin Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, Mr. Shashank Bhasin, learned counsel for opposite party no.1 whose counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 03.11.2023 passed by Central Board of Secondary Education whereby petitioner's application for change of date of birth from 06.08.1998 to 06.08.1995 has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that inadvertently at the time of admission into school, the date of birth was wrongly mentioned as 06.08.1998 in place of 06.08.1995, which has continued till date. It is submitted that petitioner's father late Ram Sajiwan passed away on 13.12.1995 and it is but natural that petitioner was born prior to that date and the date of death of petitioner's father clearly evidences the fact that petitioner was born on 1995 and not 1998. It is submitted that the concerned authority has not even adverted to birth certificate issued by hospital concerned regarding date of birth of petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.1 has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with the submission that date of birth has been indicated in the mark- sheet on the basis of form filled by petitioner's mother at the time of admission into school. It is submitted that even thereafter, no effort was made by petitioner at the time of filling of the form pertaining to Class-X examinations for seeking any change in date of birth. It is submitted that petition therefore is also highly time barred. He has also adverted to judgment rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Km. Rushda Parveen versus State of U.P. Writ-C No. 1552 of 2024 whereby the Court declined to interfere with regard to change of date of birth. He has also adverted to Special Appeal Defective No. 452 of 2024, Km. Rushda Parveen versus State of U.P. to submit that Division Bench has clearly held that in such cases the writ courts should not enter into merit of the issue and in fact a declaration before Civil Court should be sought since disputed questions of fact cannot be entered into by writ court. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that the entire basis of change of date of birth issued by petitioner rests on the hospital certificate issued on 26.08.1995 a photo-copy of which has been brought on record as annexure no.2. It is also evident from a perusal of counter affidavit that the date of birth of petitioner was recorded as 06.08.1998 on the basis of admission form filled up by petitioner's guardian on 18.04.2007. It also indicates that date of birth of petitioner has been recorded by the school on the basis of details mentioned in the parivar register which was also produced by the guardian of petitioner i.e. his mother. 6. Division Bench of this Court in the Special Appeal in the case of Km. Rushda Parveen (supra) has clearly held that with regard to change in date of birth on the basis of certain documents, it would be appropriate that a declaration before civil court is sought which can adjudicate disputed questions of fact since for a writ court it is unadvisable to enter into such disputed questions of fact. 7. Upon applicability of aforesaid judgment in the present facts and circumstances of the case, the entire thrust of petitioner's submission is based on certificate dated 26.08.1995 issued by the Women Hospital, Raebareli , it is therefore the genuineness of the aforesaid document which is required to be adjudicated upon by leading of evidence. 8. In such circumstances, this Court is bound by the judgment rendered by Division Bench in the case of Km. Rushda Parveen (supra) and therefore without interfering with the order impugned, liberty is granted to petitioner to seek such a remedy regarding change of birth by filing an appropriate suit for declaration. 9. In view of aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench