The petitioner, filed a writ petition seeking correction of his name in his S.S.C. mark memo and passing certificate, which incorrectly recorded his name as 'Mulla Shabiralli Arunalli' due to a clerical error in the school's General Register. The petitioner, a CRPF employee planning voluntary retirement, faced difficulties due to this discrepancy. The Education Officer verified the error and recommended correction to the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education (respondent no.2). The Board objected, citing Rules 26.3 and 26.4 of the Secondary School Code under the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Act, 1965, which prohibit corrections after a student leaves school. The High Court, after hearing arguments, held that the error was clerical and technical, and directed the Board to correct the records within four weeks, emphasizing that statutory rules should not cause injustice in such cases.
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur, in Writ Petition No. 8022 of 2025, heard a petition seeking correction of the petitioner's name in his S.S.C. records -- The petitioner, a CRPF employee with 20 years of service, needed the correction for his voluntary retirement process, as the discrepancy arose from a clerical error in the school's General Register -- The court considered the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Act, 1965 and the Secondary School Code rules, particularly Rules 26.3 and 26.4, which restrict corrections after a student leaves school -- However, the court held that the error was technical and verified by the Education Officer, and directed respondent no.2 to rectify the records within four weeks -- The judgment emphasizes that statutory rules should not perpetuate injustice in cases of genuine clerical errors
The High Court allowed the writ petition, directing respondent no.2 to correct the petitioner's name in the S.S.C. mark memo and passing certificate from 'Mulla Shabiralli Arunalli' to 'Shabir Harun Ali Mulla' within four weeks from the date of the judgment
Citation: 2026 LawText (BOM) (01) 145
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 8022 of 2025
Date of Decision: 2026-01-27
Case Title: Whether the petitioner is entitled to correction of his name in the Secondary School Certificate (S.S.C.) mark memo and passing certificate due to a clerical error, despite the provisions of the Secondary School Code which generally prohibit such corrections after a student has left school
Before Judge: R. G. Avachat J. , Ajit B. Kadethankar J.
Equivalent Citations: 2026:BHC-KOL:623-DB
Advocate(s): Mr. Chinmay R. Deshpande for petitioner, Ms. T.J. Kapre, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 4, Ms. Mrunal Tavade a/w. Ms. Vedantika Naik, Advocates i/b. Little and Co. for respondent no.2
Appellant: Shabir Harun Ali Mulla
Respondent: The State of Maharashtra, Divisional Secretary, Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Pune (Kolhapur Divisional Board), The Principal, Jayram Swami Vidya Mandir, Education Officer (Secondary School) Satara Zilla Parishad, Satara
Nature of Litigation: Writ Petition seeking correction of name in educational records due to a clerical error
Remedy Sought: The petitioner seeks direction to respondent no.2 to rectify the clerical error in his S.S.C. record and issue corrected mark memo and passing certificate
Filing Reason: Discrepancy in the petitioner's actual name and the name recorded in S.S.C. documents, causing difficulties in his voluntary retirement process from CRPF
Previous Decisions: The Education Officer verified the error and recommended correction to the Board via letter dated 25.9.2024, but the Board objected based on Secondary School Code rules
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to correction of his name in S.S.C. records despite Secondary School Code rules prohibiting corrections after a student leaves school Whether the error is clerical and technical, warranting rectification under principles of natural justice and equity
Submissions/Arguments: Petitioner's counsel argued that the error was clerical, verified by the Education Officer, and necessary for voluntary retirement Respondent no.2's counsel objected, citing Rules 26.3 and 26.4 of the Secondary School Code which prohibit corrections after a student leaves school State's AGP supported the petitioner, noting the Education Officer's recommendation for correction
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that statutory rules, such as those in the Secondary School Code, should not be applied rigidly to perpetuate injustice in cases of genuine clerical or technical errors -- The error was verified by the Education Officer as technical, and correcting it aligns with principles of natural justice and equity, especially given the petitioner's practical hardships
Judgment Excerpts: The petitioner seeks correction in his name in the record of his Secondary School Certificate Examination (S.S.C.) mark memo and S.S.C. examination passing certificate The petitioner's name has been wrongly recorded on both these documents as 'Mulla Shabiralli Arunalli' The Education Officer verified the record and was satisfied that it was a technical error fit to be rectified Respondent no.2 objected, citing Rules 26.3 and 26.4 which state that corrections shall not be allowed if the student has left the school The court directed respondent no.2 to rectify the clerical error within four weeks
Procedural History: The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court after the Education Officer recommended correction but the Board objected -- The court heard the petition finally, made the rule returnable forthwith, and delivered the judgment on January 27, 2026
