#M.Azhagu Sundaram v. Kalakad, Tirunelveli District
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
This writ petition stands allowed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. The petitioner has placed convincing materials that his daughter was actually born on 30.06.2001. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to issue a fresh SSLC Certificate indicating the correct date of birth of the petitioner-s daughter within a period of two weeks from the…
Judgment
PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent bearing No.A.Thi.Mu.No.3/3026/B~6(2)2018 dated 13.12.2018 and consequently direct the first respondent to effect necessary changes regarding the date of birth of petitioner-s daughter A.Bharathi from 30.06.2002 to 30.06.2001 in her S.S.L.C certificate within a stipulated time. !For Petitioner : Mr.S.Siva Ilayaraja ^For Respondents : Mrs.S.Srimathy, Special Government Pleader :ORDER The petitioner-s daughter studied in the second respondent school. Her date of birth was wrongly entered in the SSLC certificate. It should be 30.06.2001. But, it reads as 30.06.2002. It appears that the mistake was committed by the second respondent. Therefore, the writ petitioner moved the first respondent seeking relief. But, the first respondent declined to accept the petitioner-s request. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.
#2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.
#3. The petitioner has placed convincing materials that his daughter was actually born on 30.06.2001. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to issue a fresh SSLC Certificate indicating the correct date of birth of the petitioner-s daughter within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The order impugned in this writ petition is quashed. This writ petition stands allowed. No costs. To 1.The Joint Director, Directorate of School Examination (SSLC), DPI Complex, College Road, Nungampakkam, Chennai ? 600 006.
#2. The Headmaster, St.Xavier Middle School, Xavierpuram, Kalakad, Tirunelveli District.
#3. The Headmaster, Government Higher Secondary School, Kalakad, Tirunelveli District.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: This writ petition stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Madras High Court, on 19 Nov 2002. The bench was G R SWAMINATHAN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.