- (1.) RAJEEV Gupta, C. J. Petitioner Jaggi Ram has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs : " (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice and order dated 20-06-2001 and 02-04-2002 and set aside order of State Service Tribunal dated 22-10-02 annexures No. 4, 9 and 11 to this writ petition issued by re spondent no. 5 and 6. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus com manding the respondents to al low the petitioner to continue his services with the respondents. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus com manding the respondents to make the correction in the serv ice record of the petitioner ac cording of birth certificate. (iv) Issue any ether suitable writ, or der or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circum stances of the case. (v) Award the cost of the petition of the petitioner. (vi) So God help me. "
(2.) THE petitioner, in substance, is seeking quashing of the impugned judg ment dated 22-10-2002 passed by Pub lic Services Tribunal, Uttarakhand in Claim Petition No. 14 of 2002. Brief facts of the case, relevant for deciding this writ petition, are that petitioner Jaggi Ram was appointed as Sweeper by Nagar Palika Parishad, Rishikesh on 01-04-1967. The petitioner, after having remained in service for a period of about 35 years, was served with a notice dated 20-06-2001 by Nagar Palika Parishad, Rishikesh informing him of his retirement on attaining the age of superannuation on 31- 03-2002. The pe titioner eventually retired from service on 31-03-2002. The petitioner, claiming that his correct date of birth was 26-09-1949 and seeking his continuance in service for a further period of about 7 years, filed the claim petition before the Public Services Tribunal, Uttarakhand, which was dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 22-10-2002. Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 i. e. Chairman and Executive Officer of Nagar Palika Parishad, Rishikesh, in their counter affidavit, have categorically stated that, in the service record, the pe titioner's date of birth was recorded as 01-04-1942 and, as such, he was rightly retired on attaining the age of superan nuation i. e. 60 years on 31-03-2002 and the petitioner was informed in advance about the same vide notice dated 20-06-2001.
(3.) THE Tribunal, on a thorough con sideration of the rival submissions of the parties and following the dicta of the Apex Court in the cases of State of Uttaranchal Vs. Pitamber Dutt Semwal 2002 (97)FLR 773; C. M. O. Vs. Khadeer Khadri 1995 (71) FLR 9; Commissioner of Police Vs. Bhagwan V. Lahane AIR 1997 SC 1986; and Union of India and others Vs. Kanti Lal Hematram Pandya AIR 1995 SC 1349, did not find any case in favour of the petitioner and, therefore, passed the impugned judg ment dismissing the petitioner's claim petition. Petitioner Jaggi Ram joined the service in the year 1967. He was served with the notice on 20-06-2001 of his pro posed retirement on attaining the age of superannuation on 31-03-2002. It is not in dispute that petitioner Jaggi Ram did not either apply for or made a represen tation to respondents Nos. 4 and 5 for cor rection of his date of birth, as recorded in his service record, for a period of about 34 years. It was, for the first time, after receiving the notice of his proposed retirement that the petitioner submitted a representation to respondents Nos. 4 and 5 for correction of his date of birth in his service record on the ground that his correct date of birth was 26-09-1949.;