Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Bihar School Examination Board (in short the Board). 2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the decision of the Board, communicated by its Assistant Secretary under his letter dated 4.9.97 rejecting his application for correction of the date of birth in the matriculation certificate. According to the petitioner, his date of birth is 15th August 1977 but the same has been wrongly mentioned as 15th August 1972 in the certificate. In support of the contention the petitioner has placed reliance on the admission register of the concerned school (Annexure-2), the consolidated statement of the students forwarded by the concerned school to the Board (Annexure-3), the Admit Card with respect to the examination in question issued by the Board (Annexure-4) and the School Leaving Certificate (Annexure-5). In all these documents the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned as 15th August 1977. 3. Counsel for the Board does not dispute the correctness of the entries regarding the date of birth in the aforesaid documents. He, in fact, takes the stand that under the existing rules of procedure after five years of the concerned examination the records are destroyed and, therefore, it is not possible to verify the claim of the petitioner. He further takes the plea that as the application for correction of the date of birth was filed after inordinate delay, sometime in the year 1997, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. It is pointed out that although the certificate in question was issued to the petitioner sometime in the year 1996, in the cross list, which is issued immediately after the publication of the result, all the particulars including the date of birth of the candidate was mentioned. It is, accordingly, submit- ted that as the petitioner was aware of the mistake regarding date of birth he should have filed application within reasonable time. It is stated that on the ground of delay this Court has refused to pass positive order in some cases. 4. It is true that the application for correction of date of birth has been filed rather belatedly, but having regard to the fact that the mistake which has crept in the certificate is wholly attributable to the Board, I do not think it would be appropriate to deny the relief to the petitioner. 4. It is true that the application for correction of date of birth has been filed rather belatedly, but having regard to the fact that the mistake which has crept in the certificate is wholly attributable to the Board, I do not think it would be appropriate to deny the relief to the petitioner. It may be mentioned here that in the certificate in question two clerical mistakes had occurred. While the name of the petitioners father was wrongly mentioned, the other related to the date of birth. On application filed by the petitioner, the Board corrected the name of the petitioners father but refused to make correction in the date of birth. According to me, if on the basis of the available records the Board could allow the prayer for correction of the name, on the basis of the same records it should have corrected the mistake regarding the date of birth as well. In the circumstances, the stand of the Board that an application for correction was made after delay of five years does not appear to be fair. I am therefore inclined to issue direction to the Board to issue revised/corrected certificate. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the last date for submission of the application for appearing at the U.P.S.C. examination is 11.1.99. In that view of the matter, I would direct the Board to issue the corrected/revised certificate in accordance with the Admit Card by 8.1.99. 6. The petitioner shall appear before the Secretary of the Board along with the necessary papers by 7.1.99 at 11 A.M. 7. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. 8. Let a copy of this order be handed over to the counsel for the petitioner and the Board each.