Back
2019 Supreme(Bom) 1720
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT NAGPUR BENCH
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
Aruna Madhavrao Wankhede – Petitioner
Versus
The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 15 of 2019
Decided On : 04-12-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: A.H. Mishra.
For the Respondent: T.H. Khan.
Headnote:
Employment and Service – Quash of order – Claim of compensation - Good evidence to establish - Petitioner retired as Kendra basis of DoB recorded in her service record - However, immediately before her retirement, by representation addressed to the Chief Executive Officer Akola the Petitioner sought correction of her which was wrongly recorded Petitioner contended that due to wrong recording of her by School in SLC pertaining to the Petitioner and subsequent letter issued by the said school, the actual DoB of the Petitioner ought to have been recorded Petitioner placed on record letter obtained and obtained a handwritten certificate which reads as under – Held, In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh it was also observed that under Rule 84 of Madhya Pradesh Financial Code, DoB as recorded in the service book at the time of entering into service is conclusive and binding on the Government Servant even though a exception has been carved out in the said Rule permitting the public servant for correcting the age provided that incorrect recording of age on account of clerical error or mistake has occurred. This case also refers to the case of Commissioner of Police wherein it has been held that any employee seeking correction in his DoB as condition precedent must show that incorrect recording of DoB is due to negligence of the some other person or an obvious clerical error, failing which the office should not grant it - In the present case, applying the ratio of the judgment in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Premlal Shriwas (cited supra) which follows the ratio laid down in the case of Union of India it is beyond reasonable doubt that the Petitioner in the present case cannot be given any benefit of doubt to seek correction in her DoB after a period of 35 years from the date of entry of her DoB in the service book. It is also required to be mentioned that the Petitioner has not appeared in the present matter on the last few dates. This can be attributable to the fact that the Petitioner may have lost complete interest because, in any event the Petitioner was seeking a window/extension on the basis of her alleged DoB to be corrected - That period has also come to an end therefore all that remains in the present petition would be of academic interest to the Petitioner - Petition is dismissed
JUDGMENT :
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. By the present petition, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 21.08.2018 passed by the Respondent no. 1-Divisional Commissioner, Amravati in appeal proceedings under Rule 14 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. By the said order, the appeal filed by the Petitioner seeking correction of her Date of Birth (in short DoB) in her service record on the eve of superannuation came to be dismissed after according opportunity to the Petitioner to present her case and after hearing and following due process of law.
3. The brief facts for appreciating the present case are as follows:-
The Petitioner claimed her DoB to be 19.03.1961. The Petitioner was admitted in 1st standard in N.R. Deshpande School, Tapadiya Nagar, Akola. The Petitioner completed her education upto 4th standard in the said school and was admitted in 5th standard in another school viz. Bharat Vidhayala School, Tapadiya Nagpur, Akola and thereafter the Petitioner switched from this school to another school viz. Zilla Parishad Central School, Ugawa, Tah. and Distict Akola and completed her education up to 7th standard.
4. The Petitioner thereafter sought admission in Jankibai Dandale School, Ugawa, Tah. and District Akola in 8th standard in the year 1974. The Petitioner passed 10th standard from the said school and was issued a duplicate SLC bearing no. 141, dated 13.11.2003 which recorded her DoB as 07.04.1960.
5. The Petitioner completed her studies and joined service on 19.01.1982 on the post of Assistant Teacher at Zilla Parishad Primary School in Ugawa and during the course of her service completed her higher education up to M.A. and M.Ed. and was promoted to the post of Kendra Pramukh. At the time of her entry into service in 1982, the DoB of the petitioner was recorded as 07.04.1960 in her service. In the year 2014, the Petitioner obtained School Leaving Certificate (in short ‘SLC’) from the Zilla Parishad school which recorded DoB of the Petitioner as 19.03.1961.
6. The Petitioner retired as Kendra Pramukh on 31.04.2018 on the basis of DoB recorded in her service record as 07.04.1960.
7. However, immediately before her retirement, by representation dated 27.02.2017, addressed to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Akola the Petitioner sought correction of her DoB which was wrongly recorded as 07.04.1960 instead of 19.03.1961. The Petitioner contended that due to wrong recording of her DoB by Jankibai Dandale School, Ugawa in SLC pertaining to the Petitioner and subsequent letter dated 27.02.2017 issued by the said school, the actual DoB of the Petitioner ought to have been recorded as 19.03.1961 and not 07.04.1960. The Petitioner placed on record letter obtained from Jankibai Dandale School, Ugawa and obtained a handwritten certificate dated 27.02.2017 which reads as under:-
“This is to certify that Ku. Aruna Waman Deshmukh was student of this School. In 1974 she was studying in Std. VIII and according to general register of this school her date of birth is 19.3.1961 (Nineteenth of March N.H. Sixtyone).”
8. By order dated 27.04.2018, Respondent no. 3-Block Development Officer, Akola issued retirement order of the Petitioner on the basis of her completion of 58 years w.e.f. 30.04.2018. The Petitioner, preferred appeal before Respondent no 1-Divisional Commissioner, Akola under Rule 13 and 14 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 read with Section 274 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchyat Samitis Act, 1961 and challenged the order dated 27.04.2018.
9. The Divisional Commissioner, Akola accorded opportunity to the Petitioner and Respondent concerned and passed order dated 21.08.2018, inter alia, dismissing the appeal filed by the Petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order. The above order is impugned in the present Petition. The present Petition came to be filed on 12.09.2018.
10
