S SELVANATHAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed to set aside the order of the second respondent in his proceedings dated 01.07.2009 in Pa. Moo. No. 17378 / W.1/E1/2000, in and under which, the petitioner's request for altering his date of birth from 06.01.1952 to 23.03.1954 is rejected and to further direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to retire from service on 24.03.2012 with service and monetary benefits.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 07.06.1974 through the selection made by Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. THE petitioner has made a representation in the prescribed form to the Director of Treasuries and Accounts, Madras on 03.08.1978 within a period of five years from the date of his joining service to alter his date of birth as entered in the service register from 06.01.1952 to 23.03.1954 and the petitioner has in support of his contention enclosed the copy of his birth certificate showing his date of birth as 23.03.1954. THE representation was immediately forwarded to the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Revenue Divisional Officer has after due enquiry found his actual date of birth as 23.03.1954 and has forwarded his report to Board of Revenue, to that effect. THE Board of Revenue has in its proceedings dated 11.11.1980 accepted the actual date of birth of the petitioner as mentioned in the report of Regional Divisional Officer and has recommended for the alteration of his date of birth accordingly in his service register. In pursuance of the same, the petitioner approached TNPSC for the alteration of his date of birth in his service register.

(3.) AS rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the date of entry is wrongly given as 06.01.1952 in his school records without the knowledge of the petitioner, who was minor at that time. The petitioner, has, after he joined service as Junior ASsistant, made due representation within a period of five years for alteration of his date of birth with supportive documents and he has also made another representation to the appropriate authority for similar relief after his appointment as P.G. ASsistant. Both the representations are duly forwarded to the Revenue Divisional Officer who has after making due enquiry sent a detailed report, to the effect that the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 23.03.1954 and not 06.01.1952. The finding rendered by the Revenue Divisional Officer is also duly considered and accepted by the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue on both occasions forwarded its recommendations for allowing the request made by the petitioner for the alteration of his date of birth in his service records. However, the second respondent has without duly considering the reports and the recommendations of the appropriate authorities which are the outcome of detailed enquiry and without considering the circumstances under which the date of birth is wrongly entered in the school and consequentially in the service record chosen to reject the petitioner's request on trivial ground that as per his real date of birth, he has not completed five years and was ineligible to join first standard.