- (1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present writ petition has been preferred for the reasons that the respondents have superannuated the present petitioner wrongly on 29th February, 2008, on an assumption that the date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1950, but, in fact, the correct date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1953 and, therefore the present petitioner ought to have been superannuated on 29th February, 2011 and, therefore, the present petition has been preferred, seeking a writ of mandamus upon the respondents to rectify the date of birth of the petitioner as 20th February, 1953, instead of 20th February, 1950 and, accordingly, the petitioner be reinstated into service as his date of retirement is 29th February, 2011.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that initially when the petitioner joined respondent no. 1 - Corporation, an affidavit of a correct date of birth was filed by the present petitioner, which was also accepted by the respondents and, thus, it creates an estoppel on the part of the respondents. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is an error in the School Register and, therefore, in the certificate of Higher Secondary Examination, issued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, the date of birth of the petitioner is given as 20th February, 1950. Thus, the School Register is also wrong and consequently, the certificate, issued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, is also revealing wrong date of birth and, therefore, the petitioner must be allowed to continue his services with the respondents up to 29th February, 2011. I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has vehemently submitted that the correct date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1950 and, therefore, he has rightly been superannuated on 29th February, 2008. With the counter affidavit, the certificate, is sued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, is also annexed, which reveals the correct date of birth ot the present petitioner. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that even Annexure -D to the counter affidavit, which is a nomination and declaration form under the Employees' Provident Funds and Employees' Pension Scheme, reveals the date of birth of the present petitioner as 20th February, 1950. Likewise, there are several other evidences, annexed with the counter affidavit, which reveal that the correct date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1950 and no error has been commuted by the respondents in superannuating the present petitioner on 29th February, 2008. Even otherwise also, the present petition has been preferred by the petitioner on a last day of his services i.e. on 29th February, 2008. Thus, at the fag end of his service career the petitioner has filed the present petition for change of date of birth, which is not tenable, at law, and, therefore, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition tor the following facts and reasons: '' (i) The petitioner joined the services of the respondent -Corporation on 14th June, 1976 as Sales Boy. Thereafter, though the petitioner was knowing the date of birth, recorded by the respondents, as 20th February, 1950. no steps was taken by the present petitioner for correction of his date ot birth; (ii) A document, annexed with the counter affidavit at Annexure -C, which is a certificate of Higher Secondary Examination, issued by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, also reveals the name of the present petitioner as well as the date of birth of the present petitioner as 20th February, 1950. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this certificate was supplied by the petitioner to the Corporation. Thus, Annexure -C to the counter affidavit is a correct document, supplied by the petitioner and as per the said document, the date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1950; (iii) Annexure -D to the counter affidavit, which is Nomination and Declaration Form under the Employees' Provident Funds and Employees' Pension Scheme, also reveals the name, father's name as well as the address of the present petitioner as also the date of birth of the prespnt petitioner. As per the said Annexure -D to the counter affidavit, the date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1950. The said document (Annexure -D to the counter affidavit) has also been signed by the present petitioner. Signature on the said document at Annexure -D to the counter affidavit is tallying with the affidavit, filed in the present writ petition. Thus, Annexure -D is signed by the present petitioner and as per the said Annexure -D also the correct date of birth of the present petitioner is 20th February, 1950. Annexure -D is dated 15th October, 1991. Never any objection has been raised by the petitioner about the date of birth, mentioned ijn Annexure -D to the counter affidavit. (iv) It also appears from the facts of the case that the petitioner has retired on 29th February, 2008, having reached the age of superannuation, and on a last day of his service career, the present writ petition has been filed, looking to the affidavit, filed in this writ petition. Thus, on a last day of his service career, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for correction of his date of birth. This is not permissible in the eyes of law. On a last day, such type of petitions cannot be entertained for change of date of birth. Petitioner could not point out from any record like school register or school leaving certificate or from any other certificate, issued by the Government authority, the date of birth, as alleged by the petitioner. On the contrary, the certificate, annexed at Annexure - C to the counter affidavit, reveals the date of birth of the petitioner as 20th February, 1950. ;