Back
2017 Supreme(AP) 146
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
A. Ramalingeswara Rao, J.
Ch. Chinnakishore Venukoti – Appellant
Vs.
State of Telangana and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 34969 of 2016
Decided On : 20-03-2017
For the Appellant : J. Sudheer, Counsel
Headnote:
Constitution of India - Article 14 - Evidence Act - Sections 35 and 24 - Petitioner states that he was born to his parents in Christian Hospital District - Medical Officer gave a certificate showing his date of birth - His date of birth was entered in the register of births maintained by the Warangal Municipal Corporation - He also obtained a certificate from the said Corporation showing the same date of birth - His parents sent him to a private teacher for education and later on his father admitted him in III standard High School his father mistakenly entered his date of birth instead - He passed SSC in Intermediate University with the said date of birth - Deputy Educational Officer submitted a report to the second respondent stating that the mistake occurred due to the entry made by the clerk at the time of admission on request of the parent and Principal from. Johns High School - Respondent in turn forwarded the said report to the first respondent through letter - Respondent issued proceedings communicating to the second respondent who in turn communicated to the petitioner rejecting the request for correction of date of birth as the application for correction was made after lapse of years and not within the stipulated time of 3 years as per the orders issued in Education Department - Challenging the same - Present Writ Petition is filed – Held, Applicant would seek admission elsewhere in an educational institution or might seek a job or career where he will have to mention his age and date of birth - Even if he failed to notice the error on the date of issuance of the certificate he would come to know the same shortly thereafter - Period of three years as prescribed by Regulation is quite reasonable - It is not something like prescribing a period of limitation for filing a suit - Prescription of three years is laying down of a dividing line before which the power of the Board to make correction ought to be invoked and beyond which it may not be invoked. Belated applications, if allowed to be received, may open - Records may not be available and evidence may have been lost. Such evidence - Even convenient evidence - May be brought into existence as may defy scrutiny - Prescription of three years bar takes care of all such situations. The provision is neither illegal nor beyond the purview of Section 24 of the Act and also cannot be called arbitrary or unreasonable - Applicants seeking rectification within a period of three years form a class by themselves and such prescription has a reasonable nexus with the purpose sought to be achieved. No fault can be found therewith on the anvil of Article 14 of the Constitution - Petitioner completed Post Graduation on the basis of the date of birth mentioned in the school records at the time of admission - He cannot attribute lack of knowledge - Writ Petition was filed only when he realized that he would be crossing the maximum age prescribed by the UPSC for attending Civil Services examination - Based on the date of birth recorded in the school records, the petitioner might have taken several steps during the past years and though there cannot be any dispute with regard to the birth certificate issued by the proper authority supported by evidence of the hospital authorities - Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.
A. Ramalingeswara Rao, J.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. The petitioner states that he was born to his parents on 04.09.1982 in Christian Hospital, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. The Medical Officer gave a certificate on 11.09.1983 showing his date of birth as 04.09.1982. His date of birth was entered in the register of births maintained by the Warangal Municipal Corporation. He also obtained a certificate from the said Corporation on 03.09.2016 showing the same date of birth. His parents sent him to a private teacher for education and later on his father admitted him in III standard in St. Johns High School (English Medium) at Kazipet during the year 1989. However, his father mistakenly entered his date of birth as 04.05.1982 instead of 04.09.1982. He passed SSC in 1997, Intermediate in 1999, B.Sc. in 2002 and M.Sc. (Microbiology) in 2004 from Kakatiya University with the said date of birth. It is his case that his incorrect date of birth was continued in the academic records due to wrong entry made at the time of admission in the school. Now he states that he is preparing for Civil Services Examination for which the upper age limit is 35 years. He further states that he has submitted an application on 06.09.2016 to the Principal of St. Johns High School, Kazipet, for correction of his date of birth, and the same was forwarded to the Deputy Educational Officer, Warangal, through letter dated 08.09.2016. The Deputy Educational Officer submitted a report to the second respondent on 15.09.2016 stating that the mistake occurred due to the entry made by the clerk at the time of admission on request of the parent and Principal from St. Johns High School, Kazipet, Warangal District. The second respondent, in turn, forwarded the said report to the first respondent through letter dated 19.09.2016. The first respondent issued proceedings on 26.09.2016 communicating to the second respondent, who in turn communicated to the petitioner on 04.10.2016 rejecting the request for correction of date of birth, as the application for correction was made after lapse of 19 years and not within the stipulated time of 3 years as per the orders issued in G.O. Ms. No. 430, Education Department, dated 31.12.1992. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition is filed.
2. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents stating that as per G.O. Ms. No. 430, dated 31.12.1992, the Director of School Education is empowered to entertain and effect correction or alterations in respect of applications for correction or alteration of date of birth in the completed certificates of SSLC/HSC/HS(MP)/SSC. But, the said request cannot be entertained after a period of three years from the date of completion of the course. The registration of births and deaths is governed by the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and it has nothing to do with the correction of dates of birth entered in the certificates. In G.O. Ms. No. 383, dated 16.11.1993, it was clearly stated that in respect any proceedings before the Government or any Court, Tribunal or other authority for any alteration of date of birth in the service records, the decree of the Civil Court in regard to alteration of date of birth in the School or the University records or the contents in the judgments leading to such decree or the effect of its implementation shall not be taken into consideration in derogation to the rules. It is also stated that the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. T.V. Venugopalan (1994) 6 SCC 302 held that the administrative decision cannot be overruled by the Tribunal. In Chief Medical Officer v. Khadeer Khadri (1995) 2 SCC 82 : 1995 (29) ATC 196 it was held that the request for change of date of birth can be considered only if it is filed within the statutory period. In Board of Secondary Education of Assam v. Mohd. Sarifuz Zaman (2003) 12 SCC 408 : 2003 (10) SCALE 892 it was held that three ye
