Manojit Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Dr. B. Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner as well as Mr. R. K.D. Choudhury, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, for all the respondents. Issue involved is with regard to correction of date of birth in the Service Book of the appellant and for consequential relief. Facts in brief are that the petitioner's service as Muster Roll worker was regularised on 20.10.2005. In the Office Order of regularisation of service, his name figured at serial No. 50 with date of birth shown as 8.11.1956. Even in the Service Book opened on 30.07.2008, the same date of birth was recorded.-On 01.02.2016, an Office Order was issued to the effect that on completion of 60 years of age, the incumbents mentioned in the said Office Order will be due for superannuation from service and that they have been asked to submit pension papers at an early date. Appellant's name figured at serial No. 5 with date of birth shown as 08.11.1956 and date of superannuation as 30.11.2016. Representation dated 05.08.2016 for correction of date of birth was made by the appellant stating that the date should be 08.11.1966 and not 08.11.1956 in the light of the School Certificate enclosed thereto. The said School Certificate is dated 20.03.1993, issued by the Head Teacher of No. 310 L.P. School, Hailakandi Sub Division, Hailakandi, certifying that the appellant had studied in the said school and completed his study on 31.12.1976, after having passed Class-TV final examination. His age as on 01.01.1977 was 10 years 1 month 23 days. The matter with regard to the correction of date of birth eventually culminated in the issuance of the letter dated 04.11.2016, issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Public Works Roads Department (Audit Branch), conveying the department's inability to entertain the prayer in terms of the provisions of S.R. 8(c) of the Fundamental Rules and Subsidiary Rules (FR & SR). Aggrieved, the related writ petition was instituted, which also stood dismissed by order dated 28.11.2016. Ground assigned is that the appellant had approached the Court just 7 (seven) days prior to the date of his retirement although his date of birth was well recorded in the regularisation order of 2005 and in his Service Book which was opened in the year 2008. The learned Single Judge held that no alteration in the date of birth can be allowed except in very rare cases. Also, an employee cannot be allowed to challenge date of birth at the fag end of his service career. As regards the School Certificate dated 20.03.1993, the learned Single Judge held that the same did not irrefutably prove the date of birth of the petitioner and the same cannot be given the same credence as a Matriculation Certificate.

2. The provisions of S.R. 8(c) empowers the competent authority to make alteration of the recorded date of birth in case of non-gazetted government servants, subject to their satisfaction after enquiry that the date so recorded is incorrect. From the available records, it is seen that steps for correction of the appellant's date of birth was processed through various authorities, including the appointing authority, and a report with regard to the genuineness of the school certificate was also made by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Hailakandi. On the basis of the said Report, the Executive Engineer, PWD, Rural Road Division, Hailakandi had requested the Chief Engineer, PWD (Rods) vide letter dated 03.10.2016, requesting correction of the age of the appellant. Apropos to the letter of the Executive Engineer dated 03.10.2016, the letter dated 21.10.2016 was issued by the Additional Chief Engineer (Planning), PWD (Roads), Guwahati to the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Public Works Roads Department (Audit Branch), requesting that necessary action be taken for correction of the appellant's date of birth. It is, therefore, seen that in the spirit of the provision of S.R. 8(c), enquiri