PRAMOD KUMAR TIWARI Vs. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
PRAMOD KUMAR TIWARI
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA,J. -
(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.03.2018 whereby the petitioner's prayer for change of date of birth in the service record has been rejected. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to the respondents to correct the date of birth and the father's name of the petitioner in his service record.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he had joined the services of the respondent-Food Corporation of India in the year 1991 and at the time of joining the service his date of birth was recorded as 15.10.1960. According to the petitioner, his correct date of birth is 20.05.1965, therefore, he had submitted the representation along with his 11th class mark-sheet for correction of date of birth in his service record on 03.01.1992 and the Assistant Manager had also sent the correspondence dated 23.01.1992 in this regard to the District Manager but no action was taken by the respondents, therefore, representations were submitted by the petitioner from time to time and the petitioner had filed Writ Petition No.1645/2018, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 23.01.2018 with a direction to decide the petitioner's representation within a time bound period. Vide order dated 23.03.2018, the petitioner's representation was rejected by informing that his earlier representation in this regard was already rejected by order dated 14.10.2009. Further case of the petitioner is that a suitable recommendation was made by the Committee in its report dated 11.04.2018.
(3.) The stand of the respondents is that the plea of the petitioner in respect of correction of date of birth is misconceived. According to the respondents, at the time of appointment, the petitioner had not disclosed the fact that he was highly qualified and did not reveal the information essential for fixing his date of birth. Accordingly, the date of birth as per the consent of the Labour Union was recorded on the basis of the certificate issued by the doctor disclosing the date of birth as 15.10.1960. This medical certificate issued by the doctor was duly signed and verified by the petitioner, hence his claim for correction of date of birth at this belated stage cannot be accepted. A further plea has been raised that the petitioner's service record was created by the F.C.I. only when the office order of appointment was issued to the petitioner on 25.03.1993, therefore, the petitioner's plea that he had come to know about recording incorrect date of birth in service record prior to 1993 is unsustainable. The respondents have denied the receipt of any such representation dated 03.01.1992 or the communication dated 23.01.1992. Further plea of the respondents is that as per point No.3(5) of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, the petitioner was required to submit a certificate of the Board of Secondary Education or similar Educational Authority at the time of entering into service but he did not do so, therefore, in terms of point No.3(5)(b) the date of birth mentioned in the service record had become final.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.