Case Note & Summary
The case involved the U.P. High School and Intermediate Education Board challenging a judgment from the Allahabad High Court regarding the alteration of the respondent's date of birth. The respondent, who was the Principal of C.N.I. Boys Inter College, had his date of birth recorded as 25.6.1938 in his matriculation certificate but sought to change it to 17.8.1940 through a series of legal proceedings. Initially, a writ petition was filed in 1994, which led to a direction for the Board to consider the alteration. However, subsequent applications for change were rejected, prompting the respondent to file a suit in 1997 that was decreed in his favor. The Board's appeal against this decree was pending when the respondent filed a writ petition, which was allowed by the Single Judge of the High Court. The Division Bench dismissed the Board's special appeal on grounds of delay and merit. The Supreme Court found that the writ petition was not maintainable due to the pending appeal and that the learned Single Judge had erred in allowing it. The court emphasized that writ jurisdiction should not be exercised when an alternative remedy exists. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and allowed the appeal, with no order as to costs due to the absence of the respondent's representation.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Writ petition not maintainable when alternative remedy exists - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 9 - The court held that the writ petition should not have been entertained as the appeal regarding the same issue was pending before the Appellate Court, emphasizing that writ jurisdiction is discretionary and should not be exercised if there is an alternative remedy available. Held that the learned Single Judge erred in allowing the writ petition (Paras 10-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent had a legal right to alter his date of birth recorded in the certificate granted by the Board.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court, allowed the appeal, and stated that the writ petition was not maintainable due to the pending appeal. No order as to costs was made due to the absence of the respondent.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction
- Discretionary jurisdiction
- Alternative remedy
- Legal right to alter date of birth
- Horoscope as basis for alteration
