- (1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent undirected against the judgment dated 1.7.2006 passed in W.P.S. No. 747 of 2004, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application holding that at the fag end of retirement the date of birth of the appellant cannot be corrected.
(2.) The appellant filed the aforementioned writ petition for quashing the letter dated 12.11.2003, by which the appellant was communicated that he was to superannuate with effect from 30.4.2004 on attaining the age of 60 years in view of his date of birth as 4.4.1954.
(3.) The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: The appellant was initially appointed as general mazdoor under respondent-BBCL. The appellant s case is that at the initial appointment he submitted his matriculation certificate where his date of birth was recorded as 1.1.1951. In the service excerpts issued by the respondents, the age was indicated as 42 years as on 4.4.1986. The appellant said to have filed application for correction of his date of birth by filing representation dated 30.5.2000, which was followed by several representations. It was contended that although the respondents got the date of birth checked and verified from different sources including the Examination Board but in stead of correcting the date of birth, the impugned letter of superannuation was issued. The said writ application was contested by the respondents on the ground, inter alia, that in Form-B register opened after appointment of the appellant and in service excerpts the date of birth of the appellant was shown as 1.1.1951. The learned Single Judge took the view that in the letter of appointment issued in 1986 the age was mentioned as 42 years as on 4.4.1986 and the appellant accepted the hitter of appointment and gave his joining. The appellant also put his signature in Form-B register. On these grounds the learned Single Judge held that the date of birth, as claimed by the appellant, cannot be corrected at the fag end of the retirement.;