Shabihul Hasnain, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Virendra Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing Counsel. The prayer of the petitioner is two folds; firstly that the date of birth be corrected from 1.7.1949 to 26.8.1949 and consequently he may be allowed pensionary benefits. The petitioner's services were regularized on 9.7.1999. His argument is that if the date of birth is not changed, the regular services of the petitioner will not count to ten years and it will be short by nine days. The petitioner has been retired on 30.6. 2009.
(2.) Learned standing Counsel has prayed that he may be allowed to file counter - affidavit.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner says that he has come before this Court challenging the rejection order passed on his representation as directed in pursuance of the High Court's orders. He argues that all the factual position and the dates have already come in the rejection order. The counter - affidavit cannot make any improvement on the admitted facts. The petitioner is a retired person and he is not getting the pension. Only the legal question is being raised in this writ petition. Asking for a counter - affidavit will only delay the matter as no factual dispute can be made by the opposite parties. Necessary facts are already on record. He argues that the petition may be decided itself, on the basis of legal argument. Considering the exigencies of the matter, the Court feels that no counter - affidavit is required.;