ORDER : 1. This writ petition has been filed by Yadvi Sharma, a student, who passed her Secondary School Examination from respondent No. 1-Central Board of Secondary Education (for short ‘the Board’) in the year 2019 as a regular student of Rainbow International School, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, with a prayer that order, dated 3rd May, 2021 (Annexure P14) issued by respondent No. 1-Board, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner seeking the correction of name of her mother from Sangeeta to Sangeeta Sharma, be quashed and set aside and the Board may be directed to carry out change in the name of mother of the petitioner in her Marks Statement-cum-Certificate of Secondary School Examination, March 2019. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, has cited a recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav (Minor) (through Guardian/Father Hari Singh) vs. Central Board of Secondary Education and Others, (2021) 7 SCC 535 and in particular, Para-37 of the judgment, where a similar request made by a student-Ishita Khandelwal in the Rajasthan High Court was granted, directing the change of the name of her mother from Seema Manak to Sanyogeta Manak and the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the Board was dismissed by the Rajasthan High Court in CBSE vs. Ishita Khandelwal, 2019 SCC Online Raj. 7789. It is argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has upheld the aforesaid decision of the Rajasthan High Court and issued certain directions, in Para-194 of the judgment as to the manner in which necessary corrections are required to be made. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1-Board has opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner approached the Board and the application of the petitioner was rejected by the Board prior to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jigya Yadav's case (supra), therefore, she may be required to again approach the Board with a fresh representation. 4. In our considered view, unlike in the case before Rajasthan High Court, the instant case does not involve the change of name of the mother of the petitioner, as her name continues to be Sangeeta. The petitioner has only prayed for inclusion of the surname ‘Sharma’ with the name of her mother Sangeeta. 5. 4. In our considered view, unlike in the case before Rajasthan High Court, the instant case does not involve the change of name of the mother of the petitioner, as her name continues to be Sangeeta. The petitioner has only prayed for inclusion of the surname ‘Sharma’ with the name of her mother Sangeeta. 5. The birth certificate of the petitioner, which is produced on record as Annexure P1, indicates the name of the petitioner as Yadvi Sharma besides the name of her mother as Sangeeta Sharma. The date of registration of the birth of the petitioner is 3rd February, 2004. Therefore, even if the said certificate is issued on 15th October, 2020, it cannot be said that the entry has been made later on. 6. The certificate issued by Gram Panchayat Jamula, Development Block Suleh, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra on 27th February, 2006 (Annexure P2) also indicates the name of petitioner's mother as Sangeeta Sharma. Even, the certificate of bona-fide Himachali (Annexure P3) issued in favour of the mother of the petitioner by the Executive Magistrate on 4th June, 2003, indicates the name of the mother of the petitioner as Sangeeta Sharma. The Performance Report of the petitioner (Annexure P4) issued by respondent No. 2Rainbow International School in respect of the academic year 2008-09 also indicates the name of her mother to be Sangeeta Sharma. The reference may also be made to the Matriculation Certificate issued by Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education on 15th June, 1992 (Annexure P15) in favour of the mother of the petitioner, indicating her name as Sangeeta Sharma with Roll No. 265348. 7. In view of the above discussion, we are persuaded to allow this writ petition and set aside the order passed by respondent No. 1-Board, dated 9th May, 2021 (Annexure P14) and direct respondent No. 1-Board to issue fresh certificate with the correction prayed for, in conformity with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Para-194 of the judgment in Jigya Yadav's case (supra), within a period of one month from the date a copy of this order is produced by the petitioner. 8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.