The amendment to R.28 of the Kerala Education Rules required sanction from the Government for correction in the service register, and the Government's order did not consider exceptional circumstances for belated applications.

1. The appellant reached the age of superannuation as per the date of entry entered in her service register on 26-10-1984. Having regard to certain provisions persons like the appellant who attained the age of superannuation during the middle of the year are entitled to continue and actually retire from service on the 31st of March. Accordingly, the appellant became due for retirement on 31-3-1985.

2. The entry in the service register showing the appellant's date of birth as 26-10-1929 has obviously been made on the basis of the school register which shows that that is her date of birth. The appellant made an application to correct the date of birth in the school records/SSLC. As there was delay in filing that application, the appellant sought for permission to file the application explaining the relevant circumstances justifying such permission being granted. Permission was duly granted by the Government by its order dated 15-3-1984 to the effect that the appellant's application for correction of the date of birth in school records/SSLC be disposed of on marks with reference to the relevant documentary evidence though the application was a belated one. That application of the appellant was ultimately allowed and the appellant's date of birth was directed to be corrected in the school records/SSLC as 21-10-1931 by order dated 8-5-1985, that is, after her due date of retirement. Thereafter, the appellant made an application on 20th May, 1985 to the Government to correct the date of birth in her service register, in accordance with the correction she has secured in respect of school records/SSLC. That application of the appellant was rejected by the Government by order Ext.P2 dated 16-9-1985, on the ground that the application was given on 20-5-1985 after the normal date of retirement as per the original entry. The appellant challenged this order in O.P. No. 10813 of 1985 under Art.226 of the Constitution. The learned single judge by his order dated 16th June, 1986 dismissed the petition. The reason given by the learned single judge is that the application was not filed within the prescribed time and that therefore the application is liable to be rejected having regard to GO (Ms) No. 39/72/PD dated 22-1-1972 and GO (Ms). No.123/75/PD dated 16-6-19 75. Hence this appeal.

3. The principal contention of Shri. Joseph, the learned counsel for the appellant, is that the appellant's date of birth having been corrected in the school records/SSLC after condoning the delay in making such application, the Government was bound to correct the entry in the service register to bring the date of birth of the appellant in tune with the correction made in the school records/SSLC. In support of this contention, be relied on the decision of this Court in 1982 KLT 13 between Kunhikrishnan v. State of Kerala, Considering the aforesaid GO the Full Bench ruled that on correction of the date of birth of a private aided school teacher in the school records, correction of his date of birth in the service book is automatic. The said decision was rendered having regard to the provisions of R.28 of Chap.14-A of the Kerala Education Rules as it then stood. But in the light of the Full Bench decision of this court the said rule was amended by Notification No. GO (P) 54/80/G. Edn. dated 12-5-1980 published in the Kerala gazette dated 24-6-1980 to make it clear that there cannot be any automatic correction in the service register on the date of birth being corrected in the school records/SSLC. That is clear from the addition of the proviso to R.28 in the following terms:

"Provided the date of birth once entered and duly attested by the Educational Office under R.29 shall be changed only under sanction obtained from Government."

The sanction of the Government is necessary for the purpose of correcting the entry in the service register. In other words, the automatic correction contemplated by the earlier rule is no more available after R.28 stood amended i