PRABHATO RAM, S/O. THUNDU, R/O. VILLAGE CHALED, P.O. GARIMA, TEHSIL BHARMOUR, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P. Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, HPPWD,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was regularized w.e.f. 01.01.1994 vide office order, dated 11.06.1996.

(2.) He joined his duties on 20.06.1996. He submitted Annexure R -1, dated 20.06.1996, issued by the competent authority, whereby his date of birth was recorded as 04.05.1954. The same entry was incorporated in his service book. The petitioner has also applied for G.P.F. account number in which the date of birth is recorded as 04.05.1954. Case of the petitioner, in a nut -shell, is that on the basis of Annexure P -1, copy of parivar register, dated 21.05.2012, his date of birth is 04.05.1959 and not 04.05.1954. However, the fact of the matter is that the petitioner has retired from service after attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2012. The primacy is given to the date of birth recorded in the service record. The service record is signed by the employee concerned. Petitioner himself has submitted Annexure R -1, dated 20.06.1996, whereby his date of birth has been recorded as 04.05.1954, followed by G.P.F. account number, wherein also, the date of birth recorded is 04.05.1954.

(3.) THEIR Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. C. Rama Swamy and others : (1997) 4 SCC 647 have held that when the date of birth recorded in the service record is sought to be changed, the principle of estoppel would also be attracted. Their Lordships have held as under: