ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) Dispute with regard to date of birth of petitioner has ultimately given rise to filing of the present writ petition. An order passed by the District Magistrate dated 13.4.2012 holds that petitioner's date of birth is 6.7.1943, and consequently, he was required to superannuate on 31st July, 2001. This order is assailed in this petition.
(2.) Perusal of the records would go to show that a previous order of the District Magistrate dated 6.1.2004 was challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.3605 of 2004, which was dismissed on 17.2.2004. A special appeal no.333 of 2004 filed against such order, however, was allowed on 28.7.2011 and the order of the District Magistrate was quashed. A direction was issued to the District Magistrate to conduct a fresh enquiry and thereafter pass an order. Operative of the order dated 28.7.2011, passed by the special appellate bench, is reproduced hereinafter:- "From a perusal of the order dated 6.1.2004 passed by District Magistrate, Varanasi, whereby the appellant has been retired from service with immediate effect, it is clear that the said order has been passed on the basis of a confidential report dated 24.12.2003 of Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Varanasi and the appellant was never permitted to participate in any sort of inquiry before submission of said report by Sub Divisional Officer nor after submission of the said report the appellant-petitioner was given any opportunity of hearing. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the inquiry conducted by the Sub Divisional Officer, which was virtually acted upon by the District Magistrate, Varanasi was held behind the back of the appellant without giving any opportunity of hearing to him to have his say in the matter. Thus, action taken by the authorities concerned is in utter disregard to principles of natural justice and therefore, cannot be sustained. The learned Single Judge has refused to interfere in the order passed by the District Magistrate, Varanasi without any reason and proper justification for not interfering in the order impugned in the writ petition. Thus, the view taken by the Learned Single Judge, in our considered opinion, can also not be sustained for the same reason. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order dated 17.2.2004 passed by Learned Single Judge in abovenoted writ petition is hereby set aside and the order dated 6.1.2004 passed by the District Magistrate, Varanasi is also quashed. In this view of the matter, we direct the District Magistrate, Varanasi to hold fresh inquiry in the matter by permitting the petitioner to participate in it and take a fresh decision in the matter. Such inquiry shall be held by the District Magistrate within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of the order passed by this Court before him. With the aforesaid direction, this special appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent."
(3.) It is pursuant to this direction that the matter has been reconsidered by the District Magistrate by the order impugned. The District Magistrate in his order has clearly recorded that the original records were directed to be produced by the concern Principal, and that the original records of the institution have been produced before him on 21.1.2012, as per which petitioner's date of birth is mentioned as 6.7.1943 and not 6.6.1946, as is being claimed by petitioner.;