"Allahabad High Court Upholds Fundamental Right to Change Names under Article 21"
In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court affirmed that individuals possess the fundamental right to alter their names according to personal preference, as protected by the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. On May 25, Justice Ajay Bhanot, the sole judge presiding over the case, highlighted the universal significance of a person's name and its esteemed value in various jurisdictions.
The court emphasized that the right to maintain a chosen name or change it aligns with the extensive scope of the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This fundamental right, rooted in Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21, is inherent to every citizen. However, it is essential to note that this right is subject to reasonable restrictions prescribed by law.
Consequently, the court overturned a decision by the Regional Secretary of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, which had rejected an individual's application to change their name on high school and intermediate certificates.
The individual in question had initially been registered as 'Shahnawaz' on their board examination certificates. Subsequently, they legally changed their name to 'Md Sameer Rao' and published the alteration in the official gazette. Upon requesting the modification on their school certificates, the state education board rejected their application, leading to the legal challenge before the High Court.
The court noted that the board had rejected the application based on Regulations 40(ख) and 40 (ग) formulated under the UP Intermediate Education Act. According to Regulation 40(ख), name changes would only be entertained if the current name was gross, offensive, or derogatory. Additionally, Regulation 40 (ग) prohibited the adoption of nicknames, names indicating religion or caste, or the use of honorific titles.
Observing that students across different education boards in the country were treated as a single class for name changes, the court found disparities between the restrictions imposed by the UP Board and the absence of such restrictions in the bye-laws of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). This differential treatment amounted to a violation of the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The court declared that the restrictions outlined in Regulation 40 (ग) were disproportionate, failed to meet the standards of reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a), 21, and 14 of the Constitution, and were arbitrary in nature. Consequently, the court modified Regulation 40 (ग).
Furthermore, the court recognized that the petitioner's new name enhanced their sense of self-worth and fell within the purview of Regulation 40. Consequently, the court set aside the regional secretary's order and directed the approval of the petitioner's request to change their name from "Shahnawaz" to "Md Sameer Rao."
The judgment further directed the issuance of fresh high school and intermediate certificates reflecting the name change.
Click Here to: Download/View Related File
TAGS: Allahabad High Court fundamental right Article 21 change names personal preference right to life order single-judge Justice Ajay Bhanot universal human value cherished right jurisdiction Constitution Regional Secretary Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad Bareilly Uttar Pradesh rejection application high school certificates intermediate certificates Shahnawaz Md Sameer Rao gazette State education board Regulations restrictions derogatory nicknames religion caste honorific word title Central Board of Secondary Education CBSE UP Board equality violation reasonable restrictions arbitrary right to choose self-worth judgment fresh certificates.
