IMPORTANT POINT
Rule 2(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth) Rules, 1984 requires the High Court to determine the correct date of birth.

JUDGMENT

R.M. Lodha, J.-The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, on the administrative side, through its Registrar (Administration) is in appeal, by special leave, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated February 6,2002 whereby the Division Bench of that Court allowed the Writ Petition filed by the respondent herein and held that he was entitled to get entered March 29, 1953 as his date of birth in the service record.

2. The respondent - N. Sanyasi Rao (hereinafter referred to as the "Judicial Officer") - was selected in the judicial service of the State of Andhra Pradesh and was given an order of appointment as District Munsif. In pursuance thereof, he joined the service on October 7, 1985.

3. In the application for recruitment to the Andhra Pradesh Judicial Service for the post of District Munsif made by the Judicial Officer, he mentioned his date of birth as July 1, 1949. That date of birth was given by him on the basis of the Secondary School Leaving Certificate.

4. In 1983, before the application for recruitment to the Judicial service was made by the Judicial Officer, he had filed a suit (O.S. No. 61 of 1983) seeking declaration that his date of birth is March 29, 1953 and not July 1, 1949 and for direction to the concerned authorities to make necessary alterations in the school, college and University records. After conclusion of the trial in the suit and on hearing the parties, the Principal District Munsif at Chodavaram decreed the suit and held that the Judicial Officer was entitled to the declaration of his date of birth as March 29, 1953.

5. Thus, when the Judicial Officer joined the service on October 7, 1985, he referred to the decree dated February 28, 1985 (for short "decree") and declared his date of birth as March 29, 1953. The District Judge, Visakhapatnam, after the Judicial Officer had joined the service on October 7, 1985, opened his service register on December 30, 1985 and recorded his date of birth as March 29, 1953 based on the decree and also showed his date of birth as July 1, 1949 based on the Secondary School Leaving Certificate.

6. In 1989, after the alteration was made in the education certificates in compliance of the decree, the Judicial Officer made a representation to the Registrar, High Court for the correct recording of his date of birth. The representation was sent through concerned District Judge. The representation made by the Judicial Officer was kept pending for years together. On October 15, 1997, the High Court on the administrative side passed a Resolution (hereinafter referred to as the "Resolution) rejecting the representation made by the Judicial Officer and he was communicated of the Resolution on December 11, 1997. The Judicial Officer sought review of the decision taken by the High Court on the administrative side and that, we are informed, has never been disposed of till today. Since the decision on Judicial Officer's request for review of the Resolution was not taken within reasonable time, the Judicial Officer moved the High Court on the judicial side by filing a Writ Petition challenging the Resolution.

7. As noticed above, the Writ Petition filed by the Judicial Officer was allowed by the High Court on February 6, 2002.

8. Mr. T.V. Ratnam, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the direction given by the High Court in the impugned order is contrary to Rule 2-A of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth) Rules, 1984 (for short "1984 Rules"). He further submits that the decree obtained by the Judicial Officer declaring his date of birth to be March 29, 1953 is of no help and cannot be taken into consideration in regard to the alteration of date of birth. With reference to Rule 2(4) of 1984 Rules, he submits that the date of birth entered in the service record of the employee is final and binding and the employee is estopped from disputing the correctness of the date of birth so recorded.

9. Mr. K. Ramamoorthy, learned seni