Judgment

M.K. MUKHERJEE, J.- Special leave granted.

2. In these appeals, the appellant assails the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal, (Tribunal for short) Gauhati Bench, whereby the respondents application for alteration of his date of birth from 1-1-1934, as appearing in his service record, to 1-3-1939 has been allowed.

3. The respondent joined the service of the appellant as a peon on 15-10-1957. At the time of his entry into the service his service-book was prepared with his date of birth recorded as 1-1-1934 and educational qualification as read up to Class IX. Later on in 1962 the respondent passed the matriculation examination of the Gauhati University and on the basis of a certificate dated 27-8-1962 issued by H.M. Thanga, H.E. School, Gauhati an entry regarding this qualification was made in his service-book. Consequent upon his success in the matriculation examination the respondent got the job of a clerk and in due course he was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant in the Office of the Senior Aerodrome Officer, Civil Aerodrome, Imphal. While so employed he sent an application to the appellant on 4-6-1990 along with a photostat copy of his matriculation certificate with a request to remove the wrong entry of his date of birth as appearing in the service-book and correct it as 1-3-1939, as appearing in the certificate. The appellant did not heed to his request and, on the contrary, relying upon the date of birth as appearing in the service-book asked him to retire on 31-12-1991 by its memorandum dated 12-9-1991. On receipt of that memorandum the respondent made yet another representation which was also turned down. He then filed an application before the Tribunal in accordance with Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 which culminated in the impugned order dated 20-5-1992. An application preferred by the appellant for review of the above order was rejected.

4. From the impugned order we find that the reasons which principally weighed with the Tribunal in allowing the application of the respondent are as under-

(i) though the appellant claimed that the respondents date of birth was recorded as 1-1-1934 in the service-book on the basis of school certificate furnished at the time of appointment, neither any document nor the service-book was produced to substantiate such claim;

(ii) though the respondent had, along with his letter dated 28-8-1962, forwarded his matriculation certificate, which showed his date of birth as 1-3-1939, for making necessary correction in the service-book in accordance therewith no action was taken by the appellant; and

(iii) the certificate issued by the Sub-Registrar, Birth and Death of Imphal Municipality indicated that the respondents date of birth as recorded in their register tallied with the date as appearing in the matriculation certificate.

5. On perusal of the records, we are constrained to say that none of the above findings is borne out thereby. Besides other documents, the respondent himself enclosed a copy of the service record as Annexure A-2 to his application filed before the Tribunal and in that record it has been clearly mentioned that his date of birth was 1-1-1934 as per the school certificate. That apart, in paragraph 3 of the application he stated that at the time of his appointment he had read up to Class IX and a school certificate issued in that behalf was produced (before the appellant) in proof of his educational qualifications and that in that school certificate it was alleged that his date of birth was recorded as 1-1-1934.

6. As regards the second finding we may first refer to the averments made by the respondent in paragraphs 5 and 6 of his application. In paragraph 5 he stated that with the permission of the authority (the appellant) he appeared in and passed the matriculation examination of the University of Gauhati in the year 1962 and as per the matriculation certificate his age, as on 1-3-1962 was 23 years. In support of this st