JUDGMENT Hari Swarup, J. This petition has been filed by a candidate who had appeared at the High School Examination of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. conducted for the year 1963. The certificate issued on her passing the examination showed the date of her birth as June 13, 194S. According to the petitioner she was born on June lo, 1949 and this was the date mentioned in the Scholars' Register kept at the School on the basis of the declaration made by the guardian at the time of her admission in the School. The petitioner's case is that by mistake the wrong date of birth had appeared in the certificate. She made an application for correction of the certificate. The Board has refused to make correction on the ground that it was not due to any clerical error and that the application for correction had been made more than three years after the date on which the certificate had been issued. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that there was no statutory rule prohibiting the Board from making correction if the application for correction is made three years after the date on which the certificate is issued. He also contended that the Board cannot refuse to make correction if the mistake was not of the Board but of the candidate. From the material that has come on record it cannot be held that the mistake occurred due to any error committed by the Board. There is no assertion that in the application form the petitioner had mentioned the date of her birth as June 13, 1949 and not June 13, 1948. In view of the order of the Board, and as burden lay on the petitioner to prove the contrary it has to be taken that the mistake has occurred because of her own error in filing the application form. The question then arises, assuming that the mistake is due to the fault of candidate, can she get the certificate corrected? On behalf of the respondent no rule has been cited, which may have statutory force, prohibiting the Board from making the correction. The question then arises, assuming that the mistake is due to the fault of candidate, can she get the certificate corrected? On behalf of the respondent no rule has been cited, which may have statutory force, prohibiting the Board from making the correction. Learned Standing Counsel tried to rely on certain departmental instructions or correspondence between the Board and the State Government in respect of this matter but as the same has not been shown to have any statutory force it cannot be taken as sufficient to prohibit the Board from making the correction. The examination is held by the Board in accordance with the regular framed under the Intermediate Education Act. The certificate is also issued at the time of the conclusion of the examination after the candidate succeeds at the examination. Section 21 of the General Clauses Act provides: "Where, by any Uttar Pradesh Act, a power to issue notifications, orders, rules or byelaws is conferred, then that power includes a power, exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like sanction and conditions (if any), to add, amend, vary or rescind any notifications, orders, rules or byelaws so issued." Although this will not in term apply to the issue of certificate, the principle laid down in Section 21 will be applicable to the case of Board exercising the power under the Regulations. The age shown in the High School certificate is generally recognised as good evidence of ago of a person. It is thus not a matter of routine but is of great consequence to the person who appears at the examination. As there is no prohibition, the Board always has power to make correction if the candidate succeeds in proving that the certificate contains erroneous statement. The principle of estoppel applies as a bar only when the person who has been led to commit the mistake has so changed his position that if the mistake is rectified he would suffer an injury. If the Board will make the correction in the certificate it will suffer no injury. There thus appears to be no principle of law which may prohibit the Board from making the rectification. No rules have been shown on the basis of which the Board has to make entry in the certificate. It is, of course, not the function of the Board to determine the age of a candidate. There thus appears to be no principle of law which may prohibit the Board from making the rectification. No rules have been shown on the basis of which the Board has to make entry in the certificate. It is, of course, not the function of the Board to determine the age of a candidate. Normally it would take the date of birth as is shown in the application form, and the application form will normally contain the date of the candidate's birth as is contained in the scholar's register. If the candidate, who is normally a minor, by mistake mentions a date of birth other than the one mentioned in the scholar's register, there seems to be no bar to the Board's correcting the error if the mistake is pointed out by the candidate. The duty of the Board is to issue certificate containing correct particulars. The mere fact that the error in the certificate crept in by some mistake committed by the candidate herself in filling up the application form can be no ground for refusing to rectify the mistake. There is also no law of limitation. In the result the petition is allowed, the Board of High School and intermediate Education is directed to decide the petitioner's application on merits and to correct the same on the basis of the entries in the Scholar's Register of the Institution which had sent her up for the examination. In the circumstances of the case parties will bear their own costs.