N.N. Mathur, J. - (1.) This special appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 12.8.1999 dismissing the writ petition. This special appeal is filed by the legal representatives of deceased Nathulal. It appears that said Shri Nathulal (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) was appointed as Driver w.e.f. 23rd January, 1961 in the Rajasthan Roadways. On being declared surplus he was absorbed with the Department of Sheep & Wool by order dated 30th June, 1971. He remained absent from duty during the period 24.10.75 to 16.10.84. On attaining the age of superannuation on the basis of recorded date of birth i.e. 5.4.1927, the order retiring him from service w.e.f. 30th April, 1982 was passed. A disciplinary enquiry under Rule 16 of the CCA Rules was initiated against him. However, it did not conclude and the petitioner raised a controversy with respect to his date of birth. He claimed that his actual date of birth was 13.2.1935. This claim was rejected for the reason that his date of birth was entered in the service record as 5.4.1927 as entered in the Insurance Policy. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died on 10.7.1987. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition by an elaborate order.
(2.) It is contended by Mr. M.S. Singhvi learned counsel appearing for the appellant that no enquiry was conducted with respect to his absence from service. We are unable to agree with the submission of the learned counsel. It reveals from the record that late Shri Nathu Lal remained absent from duty during the period 24.10.75 to 16.10.84. Thus, it must be construed that late Shri Nathu Lal had voluntarily abandoned the service. The Apex Court in M/s. Jeewanlal Ltd. v. Its Workmen, AIR 1961 SC 1567 held as follows:- "....if an employee continues to be absent from duty without obtaining leave and in an un-authorised manner for such a long period of time that an inference may reasonably be drawn from such absence that by his absence he has abandoned service, then such long un-authorised absence may legitimately be held to cast a break in continuity of service.... We would like to make it clear that ... there would be the class of cases where long un-authorised absence may reasonably give rise to an inference that such service is intended to be abandoned by the employee." Similarly, in Shahoordul Haque v. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar & Anr., AIR 1974 SC 1896 , the Apex Court has observed as under : "The undenied and undeniable fact that the appellant had actually abandoned his post or duty for an exceedingly long period, without sufficient ground for his absence, is so glaring that giving him further opportunity to disprove what he practically admits, could serve no useful purpose. It could not benefit him or make any difference to the order which could be and has been passed against him.....On the view we have adopted on the facts of this case, it is not necessary to consider the further question whether any notice for termination of service was necessary or duly given on the assumption that he was not punished. We do not think that there is any question involved in this case which could justify an interference by us..." Thus, learned Single Judge rightly held that late Shri Nathu Lal voluntarily abandoned the job.
(3.) It is further contended by the learned counsel that the learned Single Judge did not consider the fact that as per the Register of the Birth Diary of Village Thana the date of birth of late Shri Nathu Lal was recorded as 13.2.1935. The contention deserves to be rejected. It is surprising that late Shri Nathu Lal having abandoned the job by continuous absence had audacity to raise controversy with respect to the date of birth. It has been repeatedly held by this Court as well as the Apex Court that inordinate delay in making the application for correct of date of birth is itself a good ground for rejection. We may usefully refer to a decision of the Apex Court in State of T.N. v. T.V. Venugopalan, 1994(4) SCT 375 (SC) : 1994(6) SCC 302 , wherein it is observed:- "The Supreme Court has, repeatedly, been holding that inordinate delay in making the application is itself a ground for rejecting the correction of date of birth. The Government servant having declared his date of birth as entered in the service register to be correct, would not be permitted at the fag end of his service career to raise a dispute as regards the correctness of the entries in the service register." The Apex Court in Union of India v. Harnam Singh, 1993(3) SCT 120 (SC) : 1993(2) SCC 162 has observed, thus - "A Government servant who makes an application for correction of date of birth beyond the time, so fixed, therefore, cannot claim, as a matter of right, the correction of his date of birth even if he has good evidence to establish that the recorded date of birth is clearly erroneous. The law of limitation may operate harshly but it has to be applied with all its rigour and the courts or tribunals cannot come to the aid of those who sleep over their rights and allow the period of limitation to expire. Unless altered, his date of birth as recorded would be determine his date of superannuation even if it amounts to abridging his right to continue in service on the basis of his actual age.";