Pravin S/o Janardhan Yeshwante vs Chief General Manager (F&A) Finance & Accounts Department, Mumbai

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1618

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AURANGABAD BENCH
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S.VENEGAVKAR
Pravin S/o Janardhan Yeshwante – Appellant
Versus
Chief General Manager (F&A) Finance & Accounts Department, Mumbai – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : G.M. Jadhav
For the Respondent: S.V. Adwant

Judgement Key Points

Question 1? Question 2? Question 3?

Key Points: - The petitioner seeks correction of date of birth in service records from 01.01.1970 to 26.09.1972 based on statutory birth documents. (!) (!) - Regulations govern service records and are to be adhered to; birth register extracts carry presumption of correctness over school records. (!) (!) - The court held that the limitation for alteration is governed by MSETCL Service Regulations 2012 (normally within one year from entry), not a six-month limit from Secondary School Code; petitioner acted within permitted period. (!) (!) (!) - Administrative delay and mechanical rejection without cogent reasoning violated principles of administrative fairness. (!) (!) - Schedule 18 of the MSETCL Regulations recognizes birth register extract as sufficient evidence; school records are not mandatory to correct in service records. (!) (!) - The petitioner’s true date of birth is 26.09.1972; respondents’ revocation of correction was unjustified; writ petition allowed. (!) (!) - Impugned communications of 18.07.2018 and 14.12.2023 are quashed and set aside; corrections to service records to be carried out within eight weeks. (!) - There shall be no orders as to costs. (!) - Supporting legal authorities: CIDCO v. Vasudha Gorakhnath Mandevlekar (birth register presumptive correctness); State of Madhya Pradesh v. Premlal Shrivas (unimpeachable evidence may correct incorrect DOB). (!) (!)

Question 1?

Question 2?

Question 3?

Table of Content
1. petitioner's claim for date of birth correction. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments regarding service regulations and limitations. (Para 6 , 7)
3. court's reasoning on evidence and administrative delay. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. conclusion on validity of petitioner's date of birth. (Para 14)
5. order to correct date of birth in service records. (Para 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT :

HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing.

3. The petitioner has invoked a writ jurisdiction of this court seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to correct his date of birth in the service record from 01.01.1970 to 26.09.1972, which according to him, is his true and correct date of birth as reflected in the birth certificate and the birth register extract maintained under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. The petitioner also challenges the communications dated 18.07.2018 and 14.12.2023, rejecting his request without due application of mind to the governing service regulations.

4. The facts are substantially undisputed. The petitioner was appointed as a “Manager” under or

Click Here to Read the rest of this document