( 1 ) THE short question which arises for consideration in this application is as to whether the respondents acted illegally in directing the petitioner to retire taking his date of birth as 1-7-1939 instead and place of 31-12-1941. At the time the petitioner was appointed in the year 1958 his date of the birth was recorded in his service book as 1-7-1939. However, on representation of the petitioner or otherwise his date of birth was corrected and a new page was added in his service book and his date of birth was purported to have been recorded as 31-12-1941. Upon discovery of the fraud purported to have been committed by the petitioner a proceeding was initiated on 27-11-1997 stating that as there had been a variation in the date of birth of the petitioner in his service book he was asked to appear on 22-12-1997 along with his explanation and enquiry was caused to be made even in the schools where the petitioner had allegedly read and it was found that the petitioner is guilty of commission of fraud. The learned Tribunal inter alia held that although the petitioner s date of birth is said to be 31-12-1941 such papers were found in the disposal records of the year