The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and St. Columba's School to correct the date of birth of a Class XII student in their records after finding that official public documents consistently reflected a different birth date than the one recorded in school records. At the same time, the Court imposed exemplary costs of ₹2 lakh on the student's parents, observing that they appeared to have furnished incorrect information at the time of school admission.
Justice Vikas Mahajan delivered the judgment on July 17, 2026, while deciding a writ petition filed by Master Aarav Giri through his guardian.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose over the student's date of birth. According to the petition, when the child was admitted to kindergarten in 2014, his date of birth was mistakenly entered in the school's records as 23 March 2010 instead of 23 April 2010. The petitioner argued that the correct date was consistently reflected in his birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Aadhaar Card, Passport and hospital records.
The petitioner also pointed out that school identity cards issued during multiple academic years carried the correct date of birth. However, while forwarding student details to CBSE for the Class X Board Examination, the school submitted the earlier date, resulting in the incorrect entry being reflected in CBSE records. Despite representations seeking correction, neither the school nor CBSE acted on the request.
The school opposed the plea, arguing that the child had secured admission only because the admission form and supporting birth certificate submitted by the parents mentioned the date of birth as 23 March 2010, making him eligible under the admission criteria applicable at that time. It contended that accepting the revised date would make the original admission invalid. CBSE also maintained that its records merely reflected the information supplied by the school and therefore no correction could be made without legal intervention.
Court's Observations
Justice Vikas Mahajan examined the CBSE Examination Bye-Laws as well as the Supreme Court's decision in Jigya Yadav v. CBSE, which recognizes that courts can permit corrections in educational records based on reliable public documents, even where school records differ.
The Court noted that the petitioner's birth certificate, Aadhaar Card, Passport and hospital records uniformly recorded his date of birth as 23 April 2010, and the respondents had not challenged the authenticity of these documents.
Referring to the Supreme Court's principles, the bench observed:
"When a student applies to a court of law... the court would permit the desired change only upon verifying the official records and upon being satisfied of its genuineness."
The High Court found that although the parents appeared to have furnished an incorrect date of birth during the admission process, the child himself could not be blamed for that act because he was only around four years old at the time.
The bench further observed:
"A wrong committed by the parents of the petitioner cannot be attributed to the petitioner, who was aged just about four years at the time of his admission and is still a minor."
The Court also emphasized the practical importance of maintaining accurate educational records, noting that inconsistencies between a student's Class X certificate and statutory identity documents could create unnecessary obstacles in college admissions in India and abroad and may even raise doubts regarding the student's identity.
Court's Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the Delhi High Court directed the petitioner to submit fresh applications along with his birth certificate, Aadhaar Card and Passport before the school and CBSE. Upon receiving the applications, both authorities were ordered to correct the student's date of birth in their records as well as in the CBSE Class X certificate within four weeks. The Court further directed that the corrected date of birth should also be reflected for the purposes of the student's upcoming Class XII Board Examination.
However, the Court held that the conduct of the parents could not be ignored. Observing that they appeared to have deliberately provided incorrect information and supporting documents during the admission process, the bench made the relief conditional upon payment of ₹2 lakh as exemplary costs.
The amount has been directed to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Bar Association and utilised exclusively for supporting the education and higher education of children of the Association's staff.
Case Details
Case Title: Master Aarav Giri Through Guardian Mr. Abhishek Giri v. St. Columbas School & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 2158/2025
Judge: Justice Vikas Mahajan
Decision Date: 17 July 2026
