Kamlesh Arora    V/s   Central Board of Secondary Education.

Case No. 133/2020

19.11.2020

1. This case is at initial stage.
2. The complainant, Ms. Kamlesh Arora has instituted a complaint against Central Board of Secondary Education hereinafter referred to as OP. Complainant’s daughter Ms. Pooja Arora qualified her all India Secondary School Examination and detailed mark-sheet dated 29.05.2018 was issued by OP. After having cleared her 10^th (Tenth) Board examination, the complainant wished to change her daughter’s name from Ms. Pooja Arora to Ms. Tamanna and accordingly a declaration was made in the Indian Express dated 05.07.2018 followed by a notification in the Gazette of India dated 07.09.2018.
3. Complainant for the first time sought necessary changes regarding the name in the records of OP on 26.11.2018 and in response thereto a letter dated 27.12.2018 was received by the complainant from the OP. It is stated that the complainant on 25.01.2019 was further informed that a court order for the purpose of change/ rectification in the name of the complainant’s daughter was required in terms of notification dated 25.06.2015. Accordingly, the complainant instituted a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction in a Civil Court, which suit is pending.
4. We have heard the counsel for the complainant and perused the material placed on record carefully.
5. The complainant took six months from the date of declaration of result to initiate the process of change in the name and for the first time sent a request for the same to the OP on 26.11.2018. Whereas OP immediately within a month responded to the letter of the complainant and asked the complainant to do the needful as per the rules of CBSE (OP). Counsel for the complainant was orally asked as to where was the deficiency of service by OP as they had replied to the complainant’s letter within a month and was asking the complainant to fulfill all the requirements as per the rules of the OP. Counsel for the complainant submitted that OP at the first instance did not inform the complainant regarding requirement of a court order which he got to know later on 25.01.2019 and hence she was mentally harassed. Point 4 of letter dated 27.12.2018 appended at page-19 as Annexure C-7 clearly mentions that Rules of the Board could be obtained from the website of OP. For ready reference point-4 of the letter is reproduced below:-

“4. The extant Rules of the Board in this regard have been notified vide Notification dated 25.06.2015. You may visit our website for further details.

You may quote the Case No. (as above) while entering into any subsequent correspondence with this Office or seeking status of the application on the cited subject.”

6. Thus, Commission is of the opinion that complainant having taken six months to decide to get the name changed and OP having responded to the complainant within a month we don’t find any deficiency of service on behalf of the OP. Therefore, we dismiss the complaint in limine with no order as to costs.
7. Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 1 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 19.11.2020