Order Petitioner has approached this Court for issuing writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to correct his date of birth in his matriculation certificate. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he passed the matriculation examination from the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna in the year 1970. Since his date of birth in the matriculation certificate was recorded as 23.6.1952 instead of 23.6.1954, he filed a representation for neceseary correction to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Bhagalpur in the year 1977. His date of birth was not corrected for a considerable long time and therefore, he filed another representation to the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna on 28.3.89. But he also did not correct the date of birth of the petitioner. Hence this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. This writ petition has been filed on 27.8.1977 for correction of the date of birth of the petitioner in his matriculation examination of the year 1970. The writ petition suffers from laches which have not been property explained. 5. On the own case of the petitioner, he filed his first representation for correction of his date of birth in the year 1977 to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Bhagalpur and the second representation to the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna on 28.3.89. Thus, the first representation itself was filed after seven years, to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, who had nothing to do with the matter. The second representation to the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board was filed after 19 years. There is no explanation why no representation was filed to the proper authority from 1970 to 1989. The petitioner did not approach this Court within reasonable time even after 1989. 5. Moreover, it is now well settled that such disputed questions of fact cannot be gone into in writ jurisdiction and that too after a delay of about 27 years. My this view finds support from a decision of this Court in L.P.A. No. 54 of 1998 (Rajiv Ranjan vs. State of Bihar & ors.) which runs as under: "The petition relates to date of birth and the dispute is as to whether the date of birth is 15.3.73. The Apex Court has held that such questions cannot be gone into in a writ jurisdiction. The Apex Court has held that such questions cannot be gone into in a writ jurisdiction. This being so, besides other points, on this score alone, the petition is not at all maintainable. Rightly learned writ Court has non-suited the appellant. The appeal has no merit and, accordingly, it is dismissed. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents has also invited my attention to the decision of this Court in CWJC Nos. 9702 of 1996, 414, 1298 & 2688 of 1997 in which this Court refused to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction in similar circumstances. 8. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.