SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(Raj) 979

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
R.S.Kejriwal, J.
Gheeshu Baig - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5521 of 1994.
Decided On : 23-11-1994

Rule 8(2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, prohibits changing the date of birth for individuals in service prior to 1.1.1979, based on the recorded date of birth in the service book/service roll.

Headnote:

Date of Birth - Service Record - The court upheld the decision of the respondents not to change the petitioner's date of birth in the service record based on Rule 8(2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, which prohibits changing the date of birth for individuals in service prior to 1.1.1979.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Male Nurse Gr. III, sought to change his date of birth in the service record from 6.9.1936 to 26.12.1939 based on his horoscope. The respondents did not respond to his representation, leading to the filing of the writ petition.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's argument was not tenable and upheld the respondents' decision not to change the date of birth, citing Rule 8(2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951.

Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's request to change his date of birth in the service record and the respondents' refusal to do so.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on Rule 8(2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, which mandates that the date of birth recorded in the service book/service roll for individuals in service prior to 1.1.1979 shall be accepted by the State Government and shall not be changed subsequently.

Final Decision: The writ was dismissed, and the court upheld the respondents' decision not to change the petitioner's date of birth in the service record.

JUDGMENT

1. - The petitioner was appointed as Male Nurse Gr. III on 27.10.1961. His date of birth in the Service Record was mentioned as 6.9.1936 on 25.8.1993, he made a representation for changing his date of birth as 26.12.1939, on the basis of horoscope but when no reply was received by the respondents, he filed the present writ petition on 26.9.1994, praying that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to change the date of birth 'of the petitioner from 6.9.1936 to 26.12.1939. It was further prayed that the respondents be restrained from retiring the petitioner prior to 31.12.1997. The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that when the petitioner submitted his horoscope, before the respondents, it was the bounden duty of the respondents to have changed his date of birth from 6.9.1936 to 26.12.1939, in his service record. The action of the respondents, not changing the date of birth on the representation of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and unjustified because in similar circumstances, the respondents changed the date of birth of one Shri Harak Chand Mahatama vide order dated 12.1.1979, marked Annexure 13. In my view the argument advanced by the counsel for the petitioner is not tenable. The petitioner has not submitted the circumstances and the facts in which the date of birth of Shri Harak Chand has been changed. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was in service prior to 1.1.1979, and as such his date of birth cannot be changed.

2. Rule 8(2)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, (for short the 'Rules') provides as under:-

"(2)(a)-In relation to a person already in the service of the Government on 1.1.1979, the date of birth as recorded in the Service Book/Service Roll shall be accepted by the State Government as date of birth of such person irrespective of the basis of authority on which it was entered. The date of birth so recorded and accepted shall not be changed subsequently on the basis of High/Secondary/Higher -Secondary School Certificate or in the first certificate issued by the Board of Education etc. irrespective of whether it is advantageous to him or not."

3. Under these circumstances the respondents were justified in not changing the date of birth of the petitioner. If the date of birth of Shri. Harak Chand Mahatama has been changed by the respondents contrary to rules, the petitioner cannot get that benefit on the basis of wrong order. It is for the respondents to see as to whether the date of birth of Shri Harak Chand Mahatama has been changed wrongly. If that is so, they are free to recall their order.

4. With these observations, the writ is dismissed.

5. A copy of this order be sent to the respondents.Petition Dismissed.

*******

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top