MANIK CHANDRA KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM
LAWS(GAU)-2018-1-194
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on January 29,2018

Manik Chandra Kalita Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Prasant Kumar Deka, J. - (1.) Heard MR. MK Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. R Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. TC Chutia, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 and Ms. K Phukan, learned Government Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3.
(2.) The present appellant as the plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 63/2014 in the court of learned Munsiff No. 1, Dhubri, against the present respondents as the defendants. The plaintiff/appellant is an Inspector of Police, O/C, Dhubri Police Station and he is supposed to retire on 30.01.2018. He filed the suit for declaration that the plaintiff was born on 05.01.1961 as against the date of birth recorded as 01.01.1958 in the Admit Card and certificate of HSLC Examination, 1976 issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Assam, the defendant/respondent No. 4 is incorrect and liable to be corrected as 05.01.1961 and for the correction of the same in the Service Book maintained by the defendants/respondents No. 1 and 2 and for a direction to the concerned defendants/ respondents for correcting the same on the relevant records. The plaintiff was born on 05.01.1961 and as against that his parents prepared horoscope immediately after his birth. He is the youngest of all the brothers of his family and his immediate elder brother is Kamakhya Kalita. The plaintiff/appellant got admitted in the LP School by his uncle who wrongly recorded his date of birth to be 01.01.1958 instead of 05.01.1961 owing to wrong calculation of English Calendar with the Assamese Calendar. He is unaware of such wrong entry of his date of birth and as a result, his date of birth was recorded as 01.01.1958 in the Admit Card of the year 1976 issued by the defendant/respondent No. 4. He was selected and appointed as Sub Inspector (S.I.) (UB) on 08.01.1984 and his date of birth was recorded as 01.01.1958 as per the date of birth appeared in HSLC Admit Card. During these long years of service, he hardly got time to think about the wrong entry in his HSLC Admit Card, Service Book etc. In the month of May, 2013, it came to the notice of the plaintiff that his immediate elder brother Kamakhya Kalita was born on 01.01.1958. He checked the matter and got confirmed that his date of birth was wrongly recorded as 01.01.1958 instead of 05.01.1961 in the admission register of the LP School. No sooner he came to know about the actual date of birth, he submitted an application dated 12.06.2013 before the Inspector General of Police, Assam, through the defendant/respondent No. 3 for necessary correction of his date of birth as 05.01.1961 in the Service Book. The defendants/respondents No. 1 and 2 failed to make the necessary correction of his date of birth in the Service Book and accordingly has filed this suit for declaration referred hereinabove.
(3.) The defendants/respondents did not contest the claim of the plaintiff/appellant by filing the written statement. However, cross examination of witnesses of plaintiff side were done by the defendants/respondents side. The learned trial court framed the following points for determination:- 1. Whether the suit is maintainable? 2. Whether the actual date of birth of the plaintiff is 05-01-1961 instead of 01-011958? 3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to get any relief as prayed for? In his evidence, in all, the plaintiff/appellant examined 5 (five) witnesses including himself as the PW 1. The plaintiff/appellant exhibited his Horoscope along with the one of his elder brother, Kamakhya Kalita and some of his witnesses. The learned trial court dismissed the suit. The learned trial court while evaluating the evidence on record kept in mind about the completion of the period of 30 years of service by the plaintiff/appellant, the relief for correction of his date of birth on the basis of Horoscope and the burden the plaintiff/appellant undertook to discharge in proving his case. The learned trial court held that the suit was not maintainable and finally came to the conclusion that the plaintiff/appellant failed to prove conclusively that the date of birth of the plaintiff/appellant has been wrongly recorded as 01.01.1958. ;


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