- (1.) Re: C.A.N. 8004 of 2011 This application has been filed for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and considering the averments made in this application, we are satisfied that sufficient reasons have been furnished and adequate grounds have been mentioned for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. Therefore, delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. Let the appeal be registered, if the same is otherwise in form. This application, therefore, stands allowed. There will be no order as to costs. Re: C.A.N. 8005 of 2011 This application has been filed in connection with the appeal preferred from the judgment and order dated 25th April, 2011 whereby and whereunder a learned Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition and directed the concerned authority namely, the appellants herein to correct the date of birth of the respondent/writ petitioner in terms of the documents brought on record by the said respondent/writ petitioner.
(2.) Mr. L. K. Gupta, learned Senior Counsel representing the appellants submits that the respondent/writ petitioner herein did not disclose his date of birth at the time of joining the service and on the basis of medical examination, the date of birth of the said respondent/writ petitioner was recorded in the office records. Mr. Gupta further submits that the respondent/writ petitioner cannot ask for changing the recorded date of birth at a belated stage upon placing reliance on the school final certificate. Mr. Gupta also submits that the respondent/writ petitioner herein passed the school final examination as a private candidate and the recording of age of a private candidate in the school final examination cannot be equated with that of an regular student.
(3.) Mr. Gupta referred to and relied on a decision of this Court in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd. & Anr. vs. Sudhendu Kumar Chakraborty & Ors., 1991 1 CalLT 318.;