( 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 1940 itself i. e. , before his date of birth. The petitioner has not been able to prove that at the time of entry into service he submitted an educational certificate showing his date of birth as 31-12-1941 and admittedly he produced such a certificate only on 10-6-1992. On perusal of the service book it was found that the first page was removed and a new sheet was replaced in its place. It was further held:"to my dismay, it is noticed that the first page of the service book was removed and a new sheet was replaced in its place. The relevant entries including his date of birth are found in the second page of the said sheet and it is said to have been signed by the then MRO penagaluru of Cuddapah district on 1-4-1987. The office clerk who made such entries counter signed the same on 25-3-1987. Therein his date of birth is written as 31-12-1941. Therein the necessary entries were made that he passed intermediate in March, 1985 vide marks sheet S1. No. 08955 and Regd. No. 008793. His service record consists of four volumes. In the second volume at page-2, on 20-2-1983 necessary entries are made to show that he passed his ssc. The fact remains that entries pertaining to his Intermediate qualification are made in the second page of his service book in the first volume itself as already stated. Admittedly a new sheet was replaced in the first volume itself as already stated. Admittedly a new sheet was replaced in the first volume of his service book. When the same is brought to the notice of the applicant s Counsel in open Court it is admitted that a new sheet was replaced in place of the old sheet".

( 2 ) IT was also found that except the first sheet of the first volume all the four volumes of the service book are elegantly maintained including the family benefit card of the year 1977 and other relevant entries which were made from 1958 to 1977 attached to the first volume are in tact. The circumstantial evidence shows that only the first sheet of the service book is replaced with a different sheet which speaks volumes about the fraudulent act of the appellant in getting the sheet replaced. It was held:"thus there is any amount of truth in the assertion of the respondents that the applicant alone is responsible for tampering with the service book in his vain attempt to establish that his date of birth is 31-12-1941 instead of 1-7-1939. In the counter it is indicated that the applicant produced a certificate dated 30-4-1952 and the same was found to have been issued in a file which was closed on 4-2-1940 by District educational Officer, Kurnool".

( 3 ) THE learned Tribunal also found that the petitioner has purported to obtain further education without getting any prior permission from the department in violation of Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil servi