Point of Law: If there is good evidence to establish that recorded date of birth is erroneous, correction cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

The petitioner, at the age of 56 years, filed this writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to correct his date of birth from 01.03.1962 to 25.03.1963. The relief has been prayed mainly on the basis of petitioner’s birth certificate (Annexure A-1). In this date of birth certificate issued on 22.05.2019 and registered on 08.04.1963, petitioner’s date of birth has been reflected as 25.03.1963.

2. It is not in dispute that in the matriculation certificate issued to the petitioner, his date of birth is reflected as 01.03.1962. It is also not in dispute that petitioner joined the service with the respondent on 26.03.1983 and at the time of joining the service, petitioner himself produced his matriculation certificate, reflecting his date of birth as 01.03.1962. It is not the case of the petitioner that he ever made any written representation/objection regarding alleged wrong entry of his date of birth in his service record. The present original application moved by the petitioner on 28.06.2019, at the age of 56 years, is the petitioner’s first ever written prayer for correction in his date of birth, in the service record.

3. Note 6 of Fundamental Rules 56 provides that date of retirement of a Government servant, be it 58 years or 60 years, as the case may be, has to be determined with reference to date of birth declared by the Government servant at the time of appointment and accepted by the appropriate authority on production, as far as possible, of confirmatory documentary evidence such as High School Certificate or extracts from the Birth Register. The Note further provides that the date of birth so declared by the Government servant and accepted by the appropriate authority, shall not be the subject to any alteration except as specified in this note, as under: -

“Note 6- (a) a request in this regard is made within five years of his entry into Government service;

(b) It is clearly established that a genuine bona fide mistake has occurred; and

(c) the date of birth so altered would not make him ineligible to appear in any School or University or Union Public Service Commission examination in which he had appeared, or for entry into Government service on the date of which he first appeared at such examination or on the date on which he entered Government service.”

Clause 7.1 of Chapter VII of Himachal Pradesh Financial Rules, 1971, provides that declaration of age made by the employee at the time of or for the purpose of entry into government service be deemed to be conclusive unless the employee applies for correction of his recorded age within two years from the date of his entry into the government service. Clause 7.1(d) of Chapter VII reads thus: -

“(d) (1) in regard to the date of birth a declaration of age made at the time of or for the purpose of entry into Government service, shall as against the Government servant in question, be deemed to be conclusive unless he applies for correction of his age as recorded within 2 years from the date of his entry into Government service. Government, however, reserves the right to make a correction in the recorded age of the Government servant at any time against the interest of that Government servant when it is satisfied that the age recorded in his service book or in the history of services of a gazette Government servant is incorrect and has been incorrectly recorded with the object that the Government servant may derive some unfair advantage therefrom.

(2) When a Government servant, within the period allowed, makes an application for the correction of his date of birth as recorded, an inquiry shall be made to ascertain his correct age and reference shall be made in all available sources of information such as certified copies of entries in the Municipal birth register, University or School age certificates, JANAMPATRI (horoscope) as the case may be. It should, however, be remembered that it is entirely discretionary on the part of the sanctioning a