Judgment K.A. Puj, J.—Rule. It is waived by the parties. Looking to the issue involved in the petition, it is taken for hearing today. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the direction to the respondent authorities to issue School Leaving Certificate as per the original record maintained by the School authority. The petitioner has also prayed for the direction to the Respondents No. 2 to 5 to make suitable correction with regard to the birth date of the petitioner’s son in their record on the basis of new School Leaving Certificate that may be issued by the Respondent No. 1 - school authority pursuant to the direction issued by this Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner’s son was studying in standard 10th in Jivkorbai Lallubhai Higher Secondary School and when he left that school, School Leaving Certificate was issued by the Respondent No. 1 school. However, the said Certificate was not in the name of the petitioner’s son but it was in the name of Patel Hiren Shavantilal. The said student was studying in the same school and hence under some mistaken belief the said Certificate was issued to the petitioner’s son. The petitioner could not verify this mistake at that stage and on the basis of Certificate issued to the petitioner’s son the petitioner’s son got the admission in Jivan Jyot Prathmik School and, thereafter, he appeared in S.S.C. Examination and he got the S.S.C. Mark-sheet in the name of Patel Hiren Shavantilal. Since the mistake was committed in the original certificate, all through out the said mistake continued. No sooner it has come to the knowledge of the petitioner the petitioner approached the respondent authorities. However, no positive response was given and hence the petitioner has filed petition being Special Civil Application No. 5010 of 2008 and while disposing of the said petition this Court has clarified that the petitioner has the remedy of approaching before the learned Magistrate. The Court has also made it clear that the order passed by the Court shall not operate as a bar to the petitioner for approaching before the Magistrate under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969. 4. The Court has also made it clear that the order passed by the Court shall not operate as a bar to the petitioner for approaching before the Magistrate under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969. 4. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner moved an application before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court, No. 6, Ahmedabad which is registered as Misc. Application No. 558 of 2008. The said application was disposed of by the learned Magistrate on 16.10.2008 and it is observed therein that while considering the fact stated by the petitioner in his application and while considering the documents produced he was of the view that the petitioner should approach the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad or before the High Court seeking appropriate declaration. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate further observed that he has no jurisdiction to decide such application. The petitioner has, thereafter, filed the present petition before this Court. 5. On notice being issued by this Court on 20.1.2009 an affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 1. Mr. M.B. Gandhi, learned advocate appeared on behalf of the Respondent No. 1. Alongwith the said affidavit-in-reply the school authority has annexed copy of the School Leaving Certificate as well as General Register. The bone of contention of the Respondent No. 1 is that in the Respondent No. 1 - school there was one student, namely, Patel Hiren Shavantilal whose General Register No. is 13820. The said Patel Hiren Shavantilal belongs to Gadhda, District : Bhavnagar and his date of birth is 29.01.1983 and he attended the last school, namely, D.C. Shah Primary School, Maninagar and he got admission in 8th Standard on 15.06.1995 and left the school after obtaining the School Leaving Certificate on 31.05.1998. The said Patel Hiren Shavantilal has not turned up at any point of time to the school. It is further stated in the affidavit-in-reply that so far as the Respondent No. 6 is concerned, his G.R. No. is 14376. He got admitted to the school on 15.06.1996 in standard 8th and after passing the 9th standard he left the school. In the General Register as and when the student leaves the school, School Leaving Certificate is given and entry in the G.R. is made. He got admitted to the school on 15.06.1996 in standard 8th and after passing the 9th standard he left the school. In the General Register as and when the student leaves the school, School Leaving Certificate is given and entry in the G.R. is made. So far as G.R. of the Respondent No. 6 is concerned, there is no entry in the school G.R. about the issuance of a Leaving Certificate and, therefore, it is very clear from the record that the Respondent No. 6 was not issued a Leaving Certificate. As against that the certificate at Annexure-D to the petition produced by the petitioner contains all the facts of Patel Hiren Shavantilal and not of Patel Hiren Sevantilal. So far as G.R. No. 13820 stated in the Certificate at Annexure-D is concerned, it is of Patel Hiren Shavantilal and Certificate No. 127/1998-99 is certificate issued to Patel Hiren Shavantilal and none else. 6. It is further stated in the affidavit on behalf of Respondent No. 1 school that the certificate issued to Patel Hiren Shavantilal seems to have been obtained by the son of the petitioner and that certificate seems to have been presented before another school for getting a transfer. However, the said student might have been knowing all the facts and even then at the time when he appeared in the Gujarat Secondary Education Board Examination, Gandhinagar in the year 1999 he seems to have filled in the facts in the form correctly and, therefore, in the Mark-sheet the correct name is stated as Patel Hiren Sevantilal. It is, therefore, stated that by getting a wrong certificate of a wrong student he has used his name for getting all examinations cleared. It is further stated that there is no mistake on the part of the school because there is no entry of issuance of School Leaving Certificate in favour of the Respondent No. 6 and, therefore, whatever may be the reasons behind such transaction between Patel Hiren Shavantilal and Patel Hiren Sevantilal, the school authority is not aware about it. The school authority is, therefore, of the view that Patel Hiren Sevantilal must have used the School Leaving Certificate of Patel Hiren Shavantilal and for getting some benefit at the relevant point of time he might have used the Certificate. The school authority is, therefore, of the view that Patel Hiren Sevantilal must have used the School Leaving Certificate of Patel Hiren Shavantilal and for getting some benefit at the relevant point of time he might have used the Certificate. It is further stated that under the rules and regulations there is always a School Leaving Certificate verification form which is prescribed in the rules and as and when School Leaving Certificate is produced, the school before which the said School Leaving Certificate is produced should send a form duly filled in the previous school for verification as to whether the details stated therein are correct or not, which is known as Schedule-VIII of the Secondary Education Rules. In the present case no such verification certificate was called for by the school concerned, namely, by the Respondent No. 2 in which the Respondent No. 6 got admitted. It is, therefore, urged that no mistake on the part of the School was committed and, therefore, the Respondent No. 1 school is wrongly joined as party respondent and hence the petition is required to be dismissed by awarding compensatory cost to the Respondent No. 1 School. 7. An affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 4. Mr. A.D. Oza, learned advocate appears on behalf of the Respondent No. 4 wherein it is stated that present petition is not maintainable. It is further stated that looking to the School Leaving Certificate produced at Annexure-D at page - 19, the same was issued on 15.6.1998 by the Respondent No. 1 and as per the said School Leaving Certificate, in June 1998 the Respondent No. 6 was in standard 10th and for the purpose of going to another school the petitioner got the said School Leaving Certificate as per Column No. 11 of the said Certificate. The Respondent No. 6 has passed standard 10th examination in March, 1999 as per Annexure-F. The petitioner has himself admitted that the Respondent No. 6 got admission in another school, namely, Jivan Jyot Primary School and from that School he appeared in standard 10th examination and according to him there is mistake in spelling in the name of petitioner. The record shows that the Respondent No. 6 has passed H.S.C. Examination in the year 2002 from Amruta Secondary School, which has issued the school Leaving Certificate on 31.05.2002. The record shows that the Respondent No. 6 has passed H.S.C. Examination in the year 2002 from Amruta Secondary School, which has issued the school Leaving Certificate on 31.05.2002. On the basis of said certificate the Respondent No. 6 has obtained admission in higher education but the details of the same are not mentioned in the petition. It is further stated that on the basis of 3 School Leaving Certificates issued by the different schools the Respondent No. 6 had studied further and after more than 6 years i.e. in the year 2008, he approached this Court by way of filing Special Civil Application No. 5010 of 2008. The petitioner should have got corrected the School Leaving Certificate on the basis of Birth Certificate. However, the petitioner has tried to take disadvantage of the birth date mentioned in the School Leaving Certificate and on the basis of the same the Respondent No. 6 is shown younger than the birth date mentioned in the Birth Certificate. It is, therefore, submitted that the order passed by the learned Magistrate is absolutely just, legal and proper and the same has rightly been not challenged. It is further stated that the petition involves disputed question of facts and various documents are required to be examined thoroughly in the right perspective by the appropriate Court/lawful authority, the issue involved in the present petition may not be entertained by this Court and hence the petition deserves to be dismissed. 8. It is further stated that the School Leaving Certificate produced on record of this petition is of the year 1998 as well as of the year 2002 and for almost 8 to 10 years the petitioner has done nothing and sat silent without there being any justifiable reasons. The petitioner has also not explained the delay occurred in the filing of the petition. It is further stated that the Regulation 12(A) of the Gujarat Secondary Education Regulations, 1974 provides for correction in the record of school i.e. date of birth, name, place of birth etc. and for that purpose, the District Education Officer is empowered to carry out such correction provided the student has not left the school. Once the student leave the school only remedy available with the student is to approach the learned Magistrate as is prescribed in Regulation 12(A)(6) and, therefore, the petition is required to be dismissed. 9. and for that purpose, the District Education Officer is empowered to carry out such correction provided the student has not left the school. Once the student leave the school only remedy available with the student is to approach the learned Magistrate as is prescribed in Regulation 12(A)(6) and, therefore, the petition is required to be dismissed. 9. It is further stated that wrong mentioning of date of birth, name, place of birth etc. is not attributable to the Respondent No. 4. The Board has jotted down entry in the mark-sheet as well as in the relevant certificate pursuant to the information being supplied by the student through the school to the Board and the Board cannot be faulted for the same. It is, therefore, submitted that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 10. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and having considered their rival submissions in light of the documents produced before the Court and in light of their pleadings contended in the petition as well as affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 as well as Respondent No. 4, the Court is of the view that a mistake might have been committed by the Respondent No. 1 - School at the time of issuance of School Leaving Certificate and instead of issuing Certificate in the name of petitioner’s son, namely, Patel Hiren Sevantilal the Respondent No. 1 school has issued certificate of Patel Hiren Shavantilal. There is no dispute about the fact that the fault lies on the part of the petitioner’s son to some extent as at that time it was not noticed by him that the correct School Leaving Certificate was not issued in his favour. There is nothing on record to attribute any malafide intention or motive to the petitioner’s son as no undue advantage seems to have been derived by the petitioner’s son on the basis of wrong certificate issued by the school. Once the Respondent No. 1 School has issued wrong certificate the said wrong was perpetuated at all subsequent stages and the mistake was not rectified. It is only at the late stage when the petitioner realized such mistake he approached the respondent authorities and even filed petition before this Court and, thereafter, filed Misc. Application before the learned Magistrate. Once the Respondent No. 1 School has issued wrong certificate the said wrong was perpetuated at all subsequent stages and the mistake was not rectified. It is only at the late stage when the petitioner realized such mistake he approached the respondent authorities and even filed petition before this Court and, thereafter, filed Misc. Application before the learned Magistrate. From the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 4 it appears to the Court that the Respondent No. 1 has tried to justify an impression upon the Court that no mistake was committed by the Respondent No. 1 school. Even the Respondent No. 4 has also raised the legal issue before the Court that once the student leaves the school, the District Education Officer cannot correct the entry in the School Leaving Certificate in view of the provisions contained in Regulation 12-A of the Gujarat Secondary Education Regulations. 11. Be that as it may, and without giving any finding as to who has committed the mistake, it appears to the Court that the petitioner’s son has got wrong certificate in 1998 when he left the School. The mistake committed at that stage is now required to be rectified and that can be done only by way of issuing direction to the petitioner’s son to hand over original School Leaving Certificate which contains the name of Patel Hiren Shavantilal back to the Respondent No. 1 school and the Respondent No. 1 school is directed to issue fresh School Leaving Certificate which actually belongs to the petitioner’s son. Once the correct Certificate as per the record maintained at the Respondent No. 1 school is issued, all subsequent mistakes can be rectified on the basis of this fresh Certificate. 12. In the above view of the matter, the petitioner is hereby directed to return School Leaving Certificate of his son which was issued in his favour in the year 1998 and on surrender of this certificate the Respondent No. 1 school shall issue the new School Leaving Certificate which is actually belonging to the petitioner’s son and as per the record maintained at the Respondent No. 1 school. Once this new School Leaving Certificate is received by the petitioner’s son on that basis the petitioner’s son shall approach to the other respondents for correction of the entries in the respective certificates issued by such School authority and/or Board. Once this new School Leaving Certificate is received by the petitioner’s son on that basis the petitioner’s son shall approach to the other respondents for correction of the entries in the respective certificates issued by such School authority and/or Board. They are, therefore, directed to rectify such mistakes on the basis of such new School Leaving Certificate issued by Respondent No. 1 School and, thereafter, it shall be submitted by the petitioner’s son. 13. Subject to the aforesaid directions and observations, this petition is accordingly disposed off.