CBSE certificates serve social purpose, says SC;
upholds right to change name on it
The Supreme Court (SC), while upholding the right of students to get their names changed in certificates issued by Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), has looked into social issues that could affect their career opportunities.
The Supreme Court today ruled on a case involving a batch of 22 petitions relating to correction/change in name/surname/date of birth of candidates or their parents in the certificates issued by the Board.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari.
Examining the bye-law of CBSE regarding change of name, the Court observed, “The concerned Byelaw has been framed on the assumption that there can be no situation wherein a legitimate need for change of name could arise for a student after publication of results. It is presumed that only typographical/factual errors could come in the certificates and they can be corrected using the provision for corrections. The presumption, we must note, is erroneous, absurd and distances itself from the social realities. There can be numerous circumstances wherein change of name could be a legitimate requirement and keeping the ultimate goal of preserving the standard of education in mind, the Board must provide for a reasonable opportunity to effect such changes.”
The SC noted the obligation of the Board to take additional administrative burden is a responsible task, but the ‘propensity of a student losing career opportunities due to inaccurate certificate is
unparalleled’.
The Court noted, “…. a juvenile accused of being in conflict with the law or a victim of sexual abuse whose identity gets compromised due to lapses by media or the investigative body, despite there being complete legal protection for the same, may consider changing the name to seek rehabilitation in the society in exercise of her right to be forgotten. If the Board, in such a case, refuses to change the name, the student would be compelled to live with the scars of the past. We are compelled to wonder how it would not be a grave and sustained violation of fundamental rights of the student.”
The Court observed that the avowed public interest in securing rehabilitation of affected persons is more important than the Board’s interest in securing administrative efficiency.
“A Board dealing with maintenance of educational standards cannot arrogate to itself the
power to impact identity of students who enrol with it. The right to control one’s identity must remain with the individual, subject, of course, to reasonable restrictions as observed above and as further discussed later,” the Court said in its order.
According to the SC certificates also serve a social purpose and it is the duty of state organisations to correct the records (of the certificates) as regards personal choices, including gender. “…. ‘gender’ is an evolving concept which could warrant changes in identity documents. In such cases, too much insistence on disclosure of reasons could be invasive to privacy.