B.L. Yadav, J. - (1.) By the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the relief has been sought for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 24-5-1986 (Annexure-5 to the petition) to the effect that the date of birth of the petitioner indicated in the High School Certificate i. e. 5-1-1929 must be taken for the purposes of retirement.
(2.) Factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner was appointed as Daftari in D. A. V. Intermediate College, Kanpur on 22-7-1947 and asserted 5-1-1929 as his date of birth, and he was promoted as Assistant Clerk on 1-8-1949. In his service record 5-1-1929 was entered as his date of birth. He had not passed his High School Examination at the time he joined service Petitioner's date of birth, when later on he appeared in High School Examination, was mentioned inadvertently by the authorities of Board of High School and Intermediate Education U.P. as 5-1-1926. On that basis assuming 5-1-1926 the date of birth shown in High School Certificate, the impugned order had been passed.
(3.) Sri V. C. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that in view of the relevant service rules, relevant G. O. (Collection of Government G.O.) chapter 13(8) No. 41/2-69-Appointment 4 dated 28th May, 1974 (Annexure 6 to the petition), the U.P. Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1974 (Annexure 7 to the petition) (for short rule 1974), G. O- dated 26th February, 1980 (Annexure-8 to the petition) and the U. P. Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) (First Amendment) Rules, 1980, (Annexure-9 to the petition), (for short rule 1980), indicate that in case an employee has not passed his High School Examination when he joined the service, in that event that age indicated by the employee at the time of lining his service, which was entered in service book, would be the date of birth relevant for determining his promotion and retirement etc. Even though subsequent to the joining his service he passed his High School and a date of birth, though different from the earlier was entered in High School Certificate, but that would neither be relevant, nor decisive for determining his promotion and retirement etc. In the alternative it was also urged that even if the date of birth as entered in service record before passing his High School Examination was sought to be changed, in that event principles of natural justice must have been observed and petitioner must have been afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing. Reliance was placed on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Roop Singh Yadav v. State of U.P., 1987 UPLBEC 607 and in State of Orissa v. Dr. (Miss) Beena Pai Dei, AIR 1967 SC 1269.;