Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28973 (RAJ)

MANISH YADAV SON OF KAMLESH KUMAR v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

CW/13025/2025 · 2025-08-28

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:34392] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13025/2025 Manish Yadav Son Of Kamlesh Kumar, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of Arniya, District Sikar (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Central Board Of Secondary Education, Through Its Secretary, Shiksha Kendra-2, Community Centre, Preet Vihar, New Delhi-110092. 2. Regional Officer, Central Board Of Secondary Education Regional Office, Todarmal Marg, Ajmer. 3. Section Officer, Central Board Of Secondary Education Regional Office, Todarmal Marg, Ajmer. 4. Principal, A.n. Public School, Radha Swami Bagh, Chommu, Jaipur-303702. 5. The Director General Of Recruiting, Indian Army, Headquarter Recruiting Zone, Jaipur Shastri Nagar, Post Box No.-35, Jaipur Rajasthan - 302016 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prakash Kumar Jha JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/08/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against respondent-Central Board of Secondary Education (for short “CBSE”) to correct the date of birth of the petitioner in the secondary school mark-sheet/certificate of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that correct date of birth of the petitioner is 19.04.2007, but due to inadvertent mistake, it has been recorded as 19.04.2004. Learned counsel [2025:RJ-JP:34392] (2 of 2) [CW-13025/2025] submits that a grievance was raised in this regard to the concerned school, who has sent the letter to the CBSE for making necessary correction in the secondary school certificate of the petitioner, but inspite of passing of considerable time, till date no decision has been taken by the CBSE, hence, appropriate directions be issued. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that an application, in this regard, has already been submitted by the concerned school to CBSE, it is expected from the CBSE to decide the said application submitted by the school, expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. 7. Needless to observe that this Court has not issued any order/direction to decide the said application in a particular way. The respondents would decide the said application strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/44