Read Time: 13 minutes
The court noted that this case involved unique circumstance where the stepmother's name was recorded in the registration details for the student's Class 10 CBSE examination. She was living with her biological father and stepmother following her parents' divorce. However, the student after attaining majority expresses her desire to have her biological mother’s name accurately reflected in official records, which cannot be overlooked.
The Delhi High Court, recently, held that the desire of an adult to have their biological mother’s name in official record is not merely a formality, but a matter of personal choice, identity, and dignity.
The bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held, “The petitioner, an adult daughter, has expressed her desire to have her biological mother’s name reflected in her official records. This is not merely a legal formality but a matter of personal choice, identity and dignity”.
The court further emphasized that “Members of the community often approach the Courts seeking relief based on unique and sometimes deeply personal struggles, and these facts cannot be overlooked in the name of rigid legal formalism”.
Shweta, the petitioner, was born in 1991 in Sonipat to Dharampal Sangwan and Santosh Kumari, whose marriage ended in separation when she was an infant. Her father took custody and raised her, enrolling her in school in 2000, where her mother’s name was recorded. Her parents divorced officially in 2001, and her father remarried Miss Kamlesh, after which Shweta claimed she faced mistreatment from her stepmother and father.
She completed her 10th grade in 2008, with her name recorded as ‘Shweta Sangwan’ and her parents listed as Dharampal Sangwan and Kamlesh. As she grew older, she reconnected with her biological mother and left her father's home in 2008 due to alleged ill-treatment. After completing her 12th grade in 2011, she sought to have her mother’s name correctly reflected in her educational certificates. Despite publishing notices in 2014 to declare her correct details, CBSE did not update her records.
Aggrieved, Shweta filed a writ petition seeking legal intervention to rectify her name and parental details in her certificates, framing it as a personal battle for rightful recognition as the child of her biological mother.
Advocate I.S. Dahiya, representing Shweta, argued that she was unjustly denied recognition by her correct identity in official records, particularly her educational certificates. It was established that she was born on September 17, 1991, to legally married parents, Dharampal Sangwan and Santosh Kumari. Her birth certificate confirmed that Santosh Kumari was her biological mother, and any deviation from this fact in subsequent records was erroneous and required correction.
It was asserted that her father misrepresented her surname and listed his second wife, Kamlesh, as her mother in her 10th-grade certificate, causing significant harm, including difficulties in employment. Advocate Dahiya contended that Shweta has the right to have her correct name and parentage reflected in official records, protected under Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Advocate Atul Kumar, representing CBSE, countered that the petition was barred by delay, as Shweta sought corrections in her 10th-grade certificate issued in 2008 but only approached the board in 2021. CBSE argued that Shweta sought not just corrections but a change in her mother’s name.
Advocate Sameer Singh, representing the school, submitted documents showing that the school had sent several letters to CBSE, attempting to resolve Shweta’s grievance, but CBSE failed to take action.
The court first outlined that “While the letter of the law provides a necessary framework for justice, the true essence of fairness often lies in examining the specific circumstances of each case. Courts exist not only to apply laws but to ensure that justice is done in a way that is responsive to the particular needs of the litigant who is not a file but a human being”.
The court further opined that individuals approached the court seeking relief based on unique and deeply personal struggles, which cannot be dismissed in favor of rigid legal formalism. It is the Court's responsibility to apply the law with compassion and a thorough understanding of the facts, ensuring justice not only serves the law but also the people it was designed to protect. If relief is denied due to strict legal interpretation, petitioners facing exceptional life circumstances, as in the present case, would be left without a remedy, the court emphasized.
In this case, the court noted that Shweta sought to have her biological mother's name reflected in her Class 10th certificate, replacing her stepmother's name, which was recorded when she was living with her father and stepmother. CBSE argued that their regulations did not allow for changes in parental names after registration.
However, the court highlighted that strictly adhering to these rules would unfairly deny Shweta her right to be recognized by her biological mother's name, causing emotional distress. The court stressed that legal frameworks should be interpreted flexibly in unique, personal circumstances to prevent injustice. The courts must exercise their discretion to provide relief in such cases, ensuring justice beyond procedural limitations and correcting genuine mistakes, the court elucidated.
The court emphasized the right of an individual to have their biological mother’s name reflected in her official records, as a matter of “personal choice, identity and dignity”. The court emphasized that denying Shweta’s request would cause unnecessary psychological stress, as she would be forced to keep her stepmother’s name in official records.
The court also stated that Shweta had a legitimate right to have her biological mother’s name reflected in her records, given the emotional and psychological weight of the situation. The request was deemed reasonable and justified. The school records, birth certificate, and admission forms already confirmed her biological mother’s name.
The court questioned the fairness of holding Shweta accountable for her father’s actions, which disregarded her relationship with her biological mother. The court noted that, at the time, Shweta was too young to influence such decisions, and observed that the emotional and legal consequences of this alteration unfairly burdened her. It further recognized Shweta’s right to correct her records to reflect her true familial ties, as originally recorded at the time of admission.
Accordingly, the court partly allowed the petition, directing “The respondent no. 1/CBSE to correct the petitioner’s name from ‘Shweta Sangwan’ to ‘Shweta’, and her mother’s name as ‘Smt. Santosh Kumari’ (who is her biological mother), in the Class 10th certificate, within a period of one month from the date of this order”.
For Petitioner: Advocates I.S. Dahiya, Ankit Dedha, Priyanka S. Aneja and Anil KumarFor CBSE: Advocates Atul Kumar and Aditi GuptaFor Dyal Singh Public School: Advocates Sameer Singh and Neelam SinghCase Title: Shweta v CBSE (2024:DHC:7349)
Please Login or Register
