JUDGMENT : Muralee Krishna S., J. [WA Nos.2780, 1631 & 2133 of 2025] In all these writ appeals filed under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act 1958 and in the writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , the issue involved is the correction pertaining to the change of name, caste and religion, as the case may be, in the Secondary School Leaving Certificate (‘S.S.L.C’ in short) of the respective writ petitioners, consequent to the Gazette notification about the same. For convenience, parties and documents are referred to in this judgment as in the respective writ petitions, unless otherwise stated. 2. W.A.No.1631 of 2025 is directed against the judgment dated 08.03.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.3832 of 2021, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed that writ petition, directing the 2 nd respondent Joint Commissioner for Government Examinations, to correct the respective entries in the S.S.L.C. of the writ petitioner. In that writ petition, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus commanding the Joint Commissioner for Government Examinations to correct the name, religion and caste of the petitioner in Ext.P1 S.S.L.C. of the petitioner in tune with Ext.P5 Gazette notification dated 08.12.2020 and also a writ of mandamus directing the State of Kerala to make necessary changes in the directions issued as per the Government Order dated 14.03.1984, considering the present change in situations. 3. W.A.No.2133 of 2025 is directed against the judgment dated 14.09.2023 in W.P.(C)No.18243 of 2023, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed that writ petition, directing the 2 nd respondent Joint Commissioner, to correct the respective entries in the S.S.L.C. of the writ petitioners concerned. The petitioners in that writ petition sought a writ of mandamus commanding the Headmaster of the Kelappan Memorial Government Vocational Higher Secondary School, Tavanur, who is the 3 rd respondent in that writ petition, to correct the caste of the petitioners in the school records based on Exts.P4 and P5 community certificates and consequently issued appropriate directions to the Joint Commissioner to accept Exts.P6 and P8 applications dated 29.07.2019, seeking correction of caste in Exts.P2 and P3 S.S.L.C of the respective petitioners and effect necessary corrections to the caste therein as Hindu Ezhava, OBC, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court and also to quash Ext.P7 endorsement dated16.03.2020 made by the Joint Commissioner. 4. 4. W.A.No.2780 of 2025 is directed against the judgment dated 26.05.2025 in W.P.(C)No.41609 of 2024, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed that writ petition, directing the appellants to correct the respective entries in the S.S.L.C. of the writ petitioner. The said writ petition was filed by the petitioner therein seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P5 note attached to the application of the petitioner, made at the time of returning the application as defective on 19.08.2024, by the Joint Commissioner of Examinations; a writ of mandamus commanding the 2 nd respondent Joint Commissioner of Examinations to accept Ext.P1 application dated 06.06.2024 submitted by the petitioner before the District Educational Officer and allow the same within a period that would be fixed by this Court. 5. In W.P.(C)No.18243 of 2023, the Joint Commissioner filed a counter affidavit dated 26.07.2023, producing therewith Exts.R2(a) and R2(b) documents. 6. By the judgment dated 08.03.2021, the learned Single Judge allowed W.P.(C)No.3832 of 2021 as mentioned above. It is relying on the said judgment, W.P.(C)No.18243 of 2023 was allowed by the learned Single Judge as per the judgment dated14.09.2023. Thereafter, by the judgment dated 26.05.2025, another learned Single Judge of this Court allowed W.P.(C)No.41609 of 2024 also. Being aggrieved, the State and its officials have filed the present writ appeals. 7. Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader for the appellants in all the writ appeals. Similarly, we have also heard arguments of the learned counsel for the party respondents-writ petitioners in each of the writ appeals. 8. The learned Senior Government Pleader vehemently submitted that, as per G.O.(MS)No.80/84/GAD dated 14.03.1984 produced as Annexure A3 in W.A.No.1631 of 2025, correction of religion and caste in the S.S.L.C is done strictly in accordance with the entries made in the school registers. No amendment has been issued by the Government in the above order till date. The said Government Order prohibits the appellants from correcting the caste name of the writ petitioners. As per the said Government Order dated 14.03.1984 and also the order bearing G.O.(MS)No.195/85/GAD dated 24.05.1985, it was specified that for changing the name, caste and religion after obtaining S.S.L.C., the candidate may obtain the sanction from the Tahsildar for Gazette Notification and a copy of the notification has to be attached along with the original certificate. The Government Order provides that no changes in this regard shall be made in the original certificate. The Government Order provides that no changes in this regard shall be made in the original certificate. The learned Senior Government Pleader further pointed out that in the order dated 26.11.2024 in R.P.No.1166 of 2024 in W.P.(C)No.7460 of 2024 which is produced as Annexure A2 in W.A.No.1631 of 2025, the learned Single Judge has accepted the aforesaid contention of the State and held that it is evident that no alterations in the original certificate is contemplated in the Government Order. The proper course to give effect to the Gazette notification is to attach the notification along with the original certificate. On a finding that such a course will clearly reflect the case status of the writ petitioners 2 and 3 therein, for practical purposes, the review petition was allowed. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Government Pleader that the aforesaid Government Orders dated 14.03.1984 and 24.05.1985 are not challenged in the writ petitions. 9. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the party respondents in the respective writ appeals-writ petitioners though initially stuck on to their arguments supporting the impugned judgments, thereby attempting to persuade this Court to accept their contentions that there is no impediment in carrying out afore said corrections pertaining to the change of the name, caste and religion in the S.S.L.C, later submitted that the non-challenging of the respective Government Orders in the writ petitions is omission on their part and hence an opportunity may be given to them to challenge those Government Orders by amending the writ petitions appropriately. 10. We have perused the impugned judgments in these writ appeals. From the perusal of those judgments, we notice that none of the statutory provisions pertaining to the correction of name, caste and religion in the S.S.L.C. is considered in those judgments. So also, necessary pleadings pertaining to the relevant statutory provisions are absent in the writ petitions. Though the appellants have taken a contention regarding the Government Orders dated 14.03.1984 and 24.05.1985, pertaining to change of name, caste and religion in the S.S.L.C, those Government Orders were neither challenged nor taken into account in the impugned judgments. 11. The issue involved in these writ appeals is the one affecting a large number of persons, including students and employees in and outside India. 11. The issue involved in these writ appeals is the one affecting a large number of persons, including students and employees in and outside India. Therefore, to give a quietus to the lis pertaining to this issue, it is highly necessary to decide the matter by referring to the statutory provisions as well as by considering the effect of the Government Orders mentioned above. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion that an opportunity can be given to the party respondents-writ petitioners in these writ appeals to amend the respective writ petitions appropriately by incorporating necessary pleadings. Therefore, we set aside the impugned judgments and remand the matter to the learned Single Judge for fresh consideration, particularly considering the fact that the impugned judgments were passed without considering the legal and factual contentions as mentioned above. In the result, W.A.Nos.1631 of 2025, 2133 of 2025 and 2780 of 2025 are disposed of by setting aside the impugned judgment dated 08.03.2021 in W.P.(C)No.3832 of 2021, judgment dated 14.09.2023 in W.P.(C)No.18243 of 2023 and the judgment dated 26.05.2025 in W.P.(C)No.41609 of 2024 and all those writ petitions are remitted back to the learned Single Judge for fresh consideration. Needless to mention that the petitioners in those writ petitions are permitted to effect necessary amendments to the respective writ petitions by incorporating necessary pleadings and reliefs against the Government Orders mentioned above, and the appellants herein are permitted to file additional counter- affidavits, within the time limit to be specified by the learned Single Judge. It is made clear that we have not expressed anything on merits regarding the legal and factual contentions raised by the parties on the issues to be decided in the writ petitions.