A.K.Yog, J. - (1.) Appellants through this appeal seek to challenge the judgment and order dated April 15, 1998 passed by learned single Judge allowing Writ Petition No. 29789 of 1995. Sharda Prasad v. State of U. P. and others quashing order dated 11.10.1995 (Annexure-1 to the petition) passed by respondent No. 1/Joint Director. Printing and Stationery. U. P.. Allahabad. Facts of the case are : Petitioner possessed no educational qualification when he got employment on dally wages against a Class IV post as Assistant Binder in a Unit of Government Printing and Stationery, U. P., Allahabad on 17.4.1960. Admittedly, he is a Government employee. His services are governed by U. P. Class IV Employees Rules, 1975. His age of superannuation is 58 years which is to be determined with reference to the date of birth mentioned in his service book as provided under U. P. Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1974, as amended vide Rule 1980 for short called 'the Rules'.
(2.) Relevant rule 2 of the Rules is reproduced : "The date of birth of a Government servant as recorded in the certificate of his having passed the High School or equivalent examination, at the time of his entry into the Government service, or where a Government servant has not passed any such examination as aforesaid, or has passed such examination after Joining the service, the date of birth or the age recorded in his service book at the time of his entry into the Government Service shall be deemed to be his correct date of birth or age, as the case may be, for all purposes in relation to his service. Including eligibility for promotion, superannuation, premature retirement benefits. and no application or representation shall be entertained for correction of such date or age in any circumstances whatsoever." According to this rule, 'date of birth' mentioned in 'service book' of a Government employee at the time of entering into service shall be deemed to be correct 'date of birth', and it shall remain the same (even if he subsequently passes High School or equivalent examination during service).
(3.) In the present case, respondent No. 1/Joint Director passed order dated 11.10.1995 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition and received by the petitioner on 10.12.1995) mentioning that the petitioner's 'date of birth' in his character roll in the "personal file' is shown as 22.8.1936 which is as per date in the 'Horoscope' given by him. But in his 'service book', it is 5.3.1944. According to service record, he had to retire on 31.8.1994 but it has not been done. Consequently, he ordered that petitioner shall retire with immediate effect. 11.10.1995. He further directed for deduction of all sums paid to the petitioner w.e.f. 31.8.1994 till date from gratuity, etc.;