Madhya Pradesh High Court rules biological father’s name must be in school records despite marital dispute

Considering the aspects that the school record of the child would ultimately form the basis of the record of other public documents like passport, Aadhaar card, Pan card, bank account, the court noted that the “parental rights of a biological father can not be undermined at the altar of dispute between the couple”.

“Therefore, the record at the inception deserves correction by way of the incorporation of names of both parents,” it held.

Background

The case stems from the plea of the biological father after the school refused to record his name as the father or provide him with access to his son’s academic progress and school app credentials.

Although the child’s previous schools had duly recorded the father’s name, the current school and local education authorities failed to update the records despite multiple requests.

It was alleged that the mother did not allow the petitioner a meaningful access or contact with the child.

The petitioner approached the mother on multiple occasions, requesting that his name be included in the school record as the child’s father and provided access to his academic records and school app login credentials.

These requests were, however, refused, the man claimed. He subsequently moved the trial court, but it dismissed the case on the grounds of maintainability.

Decision

The high court, while acting on his plea against the trial court’s verdict, ruled that the school should make the necessary correction in its records and incorporate the father’s name.

The court directed that the district education officer and district project coordinator shall ensure that the corrections in records by the school, as per the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, has been made.

“If the petitioner wants incorporation of his name in the school record and the school is bound to function in a particular manner as per the statute RTE Act, then it is the duty of the district education officer and district project coordinator to ensure compliance,” the court held.

Allowing access to the son’s school progress, the court said that the petitioner shall have limited access to the progress of his son to the extent that the progress of his son shall be communicated to him through the school app, but he shall not be permitted to engage with school authorities/staff in any manner on his own.