Sabhajeet Yadav, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.K. Sand for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The petitioner has filed the above noted writ petition challenging the order dated 11.2.1994 passed by respondent No. 2 Nagar Palika, Fatehpur whereby the petitioner has been retired from service w.e.f. 14.8.1994 on attaining 60 years age of superannuation by treating his date of birth as on 15.10.1934. According to the petitioner case his actual date of birth recorded in the service book was 15.10.1938 and not as 15.10.1934 as alleged in the notice of retirement. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that change made in the service book of the petitioner as unilateral and without affording any opportunity of hearing in utter violation of principles of natural justice and fair play, accordingly the same cannot be sustained. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner appears to have some substance. I have perused the notice dated 11.2.1994 impugned in the writ petition there appears nothing to show that before changing the date of birth as alleged by the petitioner in the service book the petitioner was ever asked to make any comment over the same. In response the learned Counsel for the respondent Sri A.K. Sand has vehemently argued that since after receipt of notice of retirement the petitioner has given an application to the Executive Officer, Nagar Palika on 17.3.1994 along with his medical certificate showing his age as 56 years by that time and after considering the materials and horoscope submitted by the petitioner the decision has been taken to retire him from service on the aforesaid date as contained in the order dated 8.2.1994 filed along with the counter -affidavit as Annexure -2 therefore the requirement of principles of natural justice has been satisfied and in this connection the learned Counsel for the petitioner in rejoinder has submitted that the aforesaid inquiry which was alleged to have been conducted by the respondent authorities were ex parte and without any knowledge and notice to the petitioner therefore the same cannot be said to be sufficient compliance of principles of natural justice and fair play. In my opinion in the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is correct, accordingly the impugned order dated 11.2.1994 passed by respondent retiring the petitioner w.e.f. 14.8.1994/31.8.1994 is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before taking any decision in respect of date of birth of the petitioner. Such decision shall be taken within a period of 2 months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order passed by this Court and the petitioner shall also be personally heard before taking any such decision in the matter.;