Applications for correction of date of birth in service records must be timely; delay can invalidate claims, even with evidence.

ORDER :

Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.

Heard Sri K.Asad Ahamed, learned counsel representing M.S.P.Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S.Manidhar Pingali, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I representing the learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning for respondents 1 to 3.

2. The petitioner is the applicant in O.A.No.4525 of 2005 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad (in short 'the Tribunal).

3. The petitioner entered into service initially as Junior Assistant in the year 1978, consequent to the selection by the competent authority. He was promoted as Senior Assistant in December-2002. In the service Register, his date of birth was recorded as 4.3.1948, based on the school certificate (Ex.P15), furnished by the petitioner.

4. The case of the petitioner is that his actual date of birth is4.1.1951. He filed representation for correction of his date of birth. The 1^st representation was filed on 23.07.1981 (Ex.P5). In support of his claim, he filed extract of the Birth Register of Nandyal Municipality, Nandyal, issued in the year 1968 (Ex.P3).

5. Being aggrieved from the inaction of the authorities, he preferred the OA., The Tribunal dismissed the OA., by the order under challenge, dated 27.08.2009.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's correct date of birth is 4.1.1951, as based on the birth certificate. The birth certificate is to be given precedence over the entry in the school records. The authorities ought to have decided the representation favourably and, the Tribunal erred in dismissing the OA., He placed reliance in the case of C.Thimmaiah V. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, [2010 (4) ALD 16 (DB)]

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded in the Service Register, based on the school certificate produced by the petitioner himself before the authorities. He further submits that the representation was filed in the year 1981, but even if there was inaction on the part of the respondent-authorities, the petitioner ought to have taken the recourse under law immediately. But, he filed the OA., in the year 2005, at the fag end of his service career. The Tribunal rightly dismissed the O.A.,

8. We have considered the aforesaid submissions and perused the material on record.

9. The date of birth entered in the Service Register is based on the document of the petitioner's school certificate produced by him. The birth certificate was not produced before the authorities. The date of the birth certificate as annexed is of the year 1968. The petitioner entered into service in 1978. So, at that time, the birth certificate was available to be produced. But, he placed reliance on the school certificate to record date of birth. Further, the petitioner filed the representation, after three (03) years of entering into service and kept silence for more than 20 years. He approached the Tribunal in the year 2005 for correction, at the fag end of his service.

10. It is well settled in law that in the matters of correction of the date of birth in the Service Register, the employee has to take steps immediately and cannot wait till the fag end of his service career.

11. In Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited vs. T.P. Nataraja and others, [(2021) 12 SCC 27], the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated, that the application for change of date of birth can only be as per the relevant provisions/regulations applicable and even if there is cogent evidence, the same cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Application can be rejected on the ground of delay and laches also, more particularly when it is made at the fag end of service and/or when the employee is about to retire on attaining the age of superannuation.

12. Paragraphs 10 to 12 of Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited (supra) are reproduced as under:

10. Even otherwise and assuming that the reasoning given by the High Court for the sake of c