Decided on May 12,1994

Lachit Bora Appellant
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

Referred Judgements :-



J.N. Sarma, J. - (1.)THIS application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the order by which the Petitioner was superannuated holding that he had attained the age of retirement. The Petitioner submits that on the strength of his school certificate (Annexure -1) he was to serve for another period of 10 years and he was not to retire on 1.7.90 as was done by the authority. The Petitioner slates that in his service book the authority did not record his date of birth correctly on the basis of school certificate.
(2.)I have heard Mr. AS Choudhury, learned Advocate for the Petitioner. None appears for the Respondents. No affidavit -in -opposition has been filed and no record has been produced. The matter regarding correction of age of Govt. servant is decided in a number of cases but I only rely in a case reported in : AIR 1993 SC 2647 Secretary and Commissioner Home Deptt. v. R. Kirubakaran wherein the Supreme Court pointed out as follow:
The Supreme Court in that case considered the earlier decision that is Union of India v. Harnam Singh : (1993) 2 SCC 162 wherein the Supreme Court pointed out as follows:

A Government servant who has declared his age at the initial stage of the employment is, of course, not precluded from making a request later on for correcting his age. It is open to a civil servant to claim correction of his date of birth if he is in possession of irrefutable proof relating to his date of birth a different from the one earlier recorded and even if there is no period of limitation prescribed for seeking correction of date of birth, the Government servant must do so without any unreasonable delay.

The law laid down by the Supreme Court in this ease is as follows:

If the date of birth of a public servant is corrected only on basis of a report submitted by a Revenue Officer after holding an enquiry, according to us, it will introduce uncertainty, in public services. This court has repeatedly pointed out that correction of the date of birth of public servant is permissible, but that should not be done in a casual manner. Any such order must be passed on materials produced by the public servant from which the irresistible conclusion follows that the date of birth recorded in the service book was incorrect. While disposing of any such application, the court or the Tribunal has first to examine, whether the application has been made within the prescribed period under some rule or administrative order. If there is no rule or order prescribing any period, then the court or Tribunal has to examine, why such application was not made within a reasonable time after joining the service.

(3.)THIS being the position of law I do not find that there is any merit to interfere with the order of the authority. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. The grievance of the Petitioner is that according to school certificate he was to serve for another 10 years of service. The Petitioner may file representation before the authority and the authority may consider and dispose of it in accordance with law.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.