Back
KARDAK ETE
Tate Nabum, S/o Lt. Hejung Nabum – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. C. Modi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. R. Basar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.
2. The short grievance raised by the petitioner in the present proceeding is for a direction to correct the date of birth of the petitioner as 09.09.1978 in place of 07.07.1976, which has been wrongly entered in his service book.
3. The petitioner was appointed as constable on 28.02.1996. The age of the candidate, at the relevant point of time for appointment to the post of constable, was from 17 to 20 years. According to the petitioner, he being more than 17 years of age, he was selected and appointed as constable. The certificate issued by the Headmaster clearly reflects that the date of birth of the petitioner is 09.09.1978. The petitioner had submitted the said certificate issued by the Headmaster on 12.01.1996, at the time of recruitment. Thereafter, a transfer certificate issued on 07.10.1996 was again submitted before the concerned authority. The petitioner has also relied on the matriculation certificate which indicates that the date of birth of the petitioner is 09.09.1978.
4. It is the contention of the petitioner that he
Correction of date of birth in the service book can only be made within five years of entry into government service, and a genuine mistake must be established.
A government servant's date of birth can be corrected if the request is made within five years and does not affect eligibility for examinations, supported by a valid Birth Certificate.
The court upheld the rejection of the petitioner's request to alter his date of birth in service records, emphasizing the need for timely submissions and procedural compliance.
Applications for correction of date of birth at the fag end of service cannot be entertained, and finality and certainty in government service matters are crucial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rules invoked by the petitioners regarding the date of birth were not applicable, as the petitioners' own records acknowledged the correct....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that delay and laches in seeking correction of the Date of Birth in the service record, coupled with the prior acceptance of the recorded Date o....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
