JUDGMENT

Dr. ANAND, J. :—Leave granted

2. The respondent entered Railway service on 1-7-1955 giving his date of birth as 6-9-1930 at the time of entry into the service . That date of birth was entered in his service record. On the basis of the said date of birth, the Railway Administration issued orders on 5-2-1988/8-3-1988 for the retirement of the respondent w.e.f. 30th September, 1988, on attaining the age of 58 years. The respondent protested. According to him, his correct date of birth was 4-9-1934 and not 6-9-1930 and he was liable to be retired from service only on 30th September, 1992. The order of the Railway Administration directing retirement of the respondent with effect from 30th September, 1988 was challenged by him through OA No. 283/87 before the Central Administrative Tribunal Ahemadabad. By its order dated 26-8-1988 the Tribunal partly allowed the application directing as under :

"The decision dated 5th February, 1988 of the competent authority communicated to the petitioner under letter dated 8-3-1988 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is directed that either the general Manager or his delegate C.P.O. of the respondent Railway Administration shall inform the petitioner at the earliest about the documents with a copy thereof, on which reliance is sought by the Railway Administration for arriving at a correct decision for his D. O. B. and permit the petitioner to produce relevant documents in support of his claim and decide the same within six months from the date of this order by a speaking order after giving the petitioner a personal hearing in the light of the observations made hereinabove and in accordance with law. I have no doubt that the competent authority will decide the matter afresh, without being influenced by the orders passed earlier. It is further ordered that in case the petitioners claim for correction of birth date is established the competent authority will give effect to such corrected birth date by giving all consequential benefit on the basis thereof."

2A. In obedience to the aforesaid directions, the C. P. O. of Railway Administration held an enquiry into the claim of the respondent regarding his date of birth. parties were directed to produce their evidence and were also heard. The Railway Administration in the course of the enquiry by the C. P. O. relied upon various documents including the option forms dated 16th September, 1960 and 20th February, 1980, wherein the respondent had given his date of birth had been shown by the respondent had not availed of the opportunity given by the Railway Board in 1972 asking all the literate employees serving with the Railway to submit their representations if any, in case, they wanted any correction or alteration in their recorded date of birth, latest up to 31-7-1973. It was found that the respondent had made a representation for the first time on 25-12-1985 and then on 12-3-1987 seeking an alteration of his date of birth and claiming his date of birth to be 4-9-1934. The respondent produced copies of school leaving certificates, issued in 1988, in support of his claim that his date of birth was 4-9-1934. The C. P. O. after analysing the evidence and the material on the record and hearing the parties rejected the claim of the respondent for the alteration of his date of birth from 6-9-1930 to 4-9-1934 vide order dated 24-1-1989. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision, the respondent once again moved an application before the Tribunal. Challenging the order dated 24-1-1989. By its impugned order dated 30th September, 1993, the Tribunal allowed the application and quashed the order dated 24-1-1989 and directed the Railway Administration to alter the date of birth of the respondent in his service records from 6-9-1930 to 4-9-1934 and since , the respondent had already retired from service on 30-9-1988, the Tribunal directed that the respondent be treated as if he had continued in service from 1-10-1988 till 30-9-1992 and on that basis be given all the c