RAKESH TIWARI, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The parties agree that the writ petition may be disposed of at this stage as there is no factual controversy involved in this writ petition. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing the impugned order dated 15. 9. 2008 passed by respondent No. 1, the Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U. P. Allahabad. He has also prayed for a writ of man damus directing respondent No. 1 to correct his date of birth in High School Mark-sheet and Certificate as 18. 7. 1989. 4. The facts of the case are that the petitioner appeared in the High School examination conducted by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U. P. Allahabad in the year 2004 and in his registration form he had given his date of birth as 18. 7. 1989. After obtaining marksheet of the High School and certifi cate he came to know that incorrect date of birth has been recorded in mark-sheet as 18. 7. 1988 and in the certificate as 10. 10. 1987 whereas in both the marksheet and certificate of High School his date of birth should have been written as 18. 7. 1989. 5. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the date of birth of the petitioner is 18. 7. 1989 and the mark-sheet and certificate of High School of the petitioner show that two different dates of births other than 18. 7. 1989 written by the petitioner in his examination form. 6. The petitioner moved several applications before the Regional Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U. P. Varanasi for correction of his date of birth. When no action was taken he filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35821 of 2008 before the High Court for a direction to the Board to correct his date of birth in the mark-sheet and certificate of High School, which was dis posed of vide order dated 23. 7. 2008 with a direction to respondent No. 1 to de cide the grievance of the petitioner by a reasoned and speaking order. Pursuant to thereof, the matter was taken up by the Secretary of the Board which was rejected by the Board vide order dated 15. 9. 2008 on the ground of delay in mov ing the application. 7. 7. 2008 with a direction to respondent No. 1 to de cide the grievance of the petitioner by a reasoned and speaking order. Pursuant to thereof, the matter was taken up by the Secretary of the Board which was rejected by the Board vide order dated 15. 9. 2008 on the ground of delay in mov ing the application. 7. According to the Standing Counsel 2 years limitation are provided un der Chapter III, Rule 7 of the Calendar of the Board for any correction in the date of birth. 8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that due to own fault of the Board incorrect date of birth has been endorsed and the petitioner has only ap proached this Court for correction of his date of birth and in his examination form he had given correct date of birth, therefore, question of limitation will not apply. 9. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties I am of the opinion that the Board could not have given two different dates of births in the mark-sheet as well as in the certificate of High School for the reason that the petitioner had disclosed his date of birth in his registration form as 18. 7. 1989. Both the dates of births given in the mark-sheet and certificate are, therefore, incorrect and the Board is duty bound to correct the same. In such cases limitation ought not to be raised by the Board for its own mistake jeopardizing the future of the students. The Board was under bounded moral and legal duty in the circum stances to have corrected the mistake committed by its staff and officials and should not shelve the matter on the ground of limitation to hide its mis take/inefficiency. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Secretary of the Board is directed to issue necessary orders/direction for correction of the date of birth of the petitioner in the mark-sheet and certificate of High School forthwith within a period of one week as 18. 7. 1989 and thereafter instruct the college for issuing the same to the petitioner within two weeks. 11. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Petition Disposed Off. .