- (1.) DR. B. S. Chauhan, J. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents, namely, the Registrar, Vice-Chancellor and Executive Council of the Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (hereinafter called the respondent-University) not to superannuate the petitioner with effect from afternoon of 31-1-1996 and seeking a further direction that the respondent University should make correction of the date of birth of the petitioner.
(2.) THE facts mentioned in the writ petition reveal that the petitioner has also filed the representation on 18-12-1995 (Annexure-2 to this writ petition) before the respondent University for making the aforesaid correc tion. In the service book the date of birth of the petitioner has been record ed as 8-1-1936. THE petitioner is working as Senior Technical Assistant in the said university. As the petitioner could not seek any relief from the University, he filed the instant writ petition for the aforesaid relief. Shri Namwar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Ordinance No. 2. 5 was introduced in the calendar of the University on 9-6-1979 which provides inter alia that school leaving certificate or municipal corporation's certificate shall be relevant in determining the date of birth. The ordinance 2. 5 (1) reads as under :- "in the case of those who are able to produce School Leaving Certi ficate, Municipal Corporation Certificate in support of the date of their birth and in the case of those who have passed the Matriculation Examination or equivalent Examination, the date of birth as recorded in the School Leaving Certificate or Muni cipal Corporation Certificate or High School/matriculation Certificate, as the case may be, be treated as final and the same be recorded in the service book. " It has further been argued that the date of birth recorded in the admission certificate of the Central Hindu School, Varanasi was not recorded on the basis of any specific knowledge and thus the correct date of birth of the petitioner has not been recorded and he is entitled for the said equitus relief.
(3.) IN the case of Secretary and Commissioner, Home Department v. R. Kiru Bakaran, 1994 Suppl. 1 SCC 155, the Apex Court after referring to and considering the catina of judgments held that the application for making correction of the date of birth should be made within the time fixed by any rule or order and in absence of such rule or order, it should be made within a reasonable time. It was further held that the correction of the date of birth of public servant should not be done in a casual manner but the court must pass such order on 'material produced by the public servant from which the irresistible conclusion follows that the date of birth recorded in the service book was incorrect'. The Court observed as under : "as such whenever an application with alteration of the date of birth is made on the eve of superannuation or near about that time, the court or the tribunal concerned should be more cautious because of the growing tendency amongst a section of public servant, to raise such a dispute, without explaining as to why this question was not raised earlier". In the said case the Apex Court has also observed that the onus to prove that the recorded date of birth was wrong was very heavy on the person seeking such correction.;