Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.
Mastu Devi – Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Others – Respondents
CWPOA No. 5011 of 2019
Decided On : 27-03-2023
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1968 - Section 12, 17 - H.P. Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2003 - Rule 8 - Himachal Pradesh Financial Rules, 1971 - Rule 7.1 (2) and (3) - Gram Panchayat - Retirement - Retired on basis of wrongly recorded date of birth - Petitioner approached erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal against her notified retirement on ground that she was being retired on basis of wrongly recorded date of birth in her service – Certificate cannot be considered as an authentic document for determining date of birth of petitioner. [Para 22]
Finding of the Court: Jeet Singh had appeared before Tribunal and had claimed that he had authenticated entries in certificate (A-1) and (A-3) on basis of Panchayat record, but it is a fact that except date of birth, no other record related to admission, passing of examination and date of admission and school leaving is maintained by Gram Panchyat - Further that record of Panchayat was not produced with information that it was gutted in fire in year - Therefore, there was no record available in school or Panchayat in year - There is nothing on record that how and on what basis certificate (A-3) was issued - However, this certificate cannot be considered as an authentic document for determining date of birth of petitioner - Aforesaid facts and circumstances create suspicion about veracity of certificates or copies thereof produced and relied upon by petitioner in support of her prayer - There is no cogent, reliable, authentic material on record to substantiate claim of petitioner to establish her date of birth - Material placed on record is of impeachable character and, thus, Court do not find it a fit case, warranting interference in retirement of petitioner.
Result: Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.
1. By filing Original Application No. 1106 of 2015 on 23.5.2015, petitioner approached erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal against her notified retirement on 29.5.2015, on the ground that she was being retired on the basis of wrongly recorded date of birth in her service record as 21.5.1957, whereas her actual date of birth was 19.1.1962 as per birth certificate issued by competent authority under Section 12/17 of Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1968 and Rule 8 of the H.P. Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2003 and certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat is in consonance with record of concerned Gram Panchayat which has also been reflected in School Leaving Certificate of petitioner.
2. Petitioner claimed that respondents, despite making written request for correction of date of birth in her service record, refused to entertain the request and returned the same unattended without following prescribed procedure under law and resultantly she was constrained to send the application alongwith encloser to respondent No. 3, District Ayurveda Officer, Shimla through Speed Post on 20.5.2015.
3. It is case of the petitioner that she was engaged as Part Time Worker in the Department of Ayurveda on 1.7.1988 in Government Ayurvedic Health Centre, Charoli Bag, District Shimla and at the time of her appointment on part time basis, she had submitted requisite documents as required by the authorities.
4. In the year 2009, petitioner was converted into Daily Waged Class-IV employee of the Department and she continued as such till her regularization of service in May, 2013.
5. Petitioner claimed that process of converting part time service as daily wages was initiated in the year 2006 and at that time, she obtained her School Leaving Certificate on 17.5.2006 (Annexure A-1) from Government Central Primary School, Kupvi, which was countersigned by Block Primary Officer, Kupvi, District Shimla, H.P. indicating her date of birth as 19.1.1962 and she had submitted the said certificate to respondent No. 4 Ayurvedic Chikitsa Adhikari, Government Ayurvedic Health Centre, Charoli Bag in the year 2009, on conversion of her service as daily wager but the same remained in the record till April, 2015 and it was returned to the petitioner by respondent No. 4, stating that the said certificate was not reflecting correct name of petitioner as her name in the record is ‘Mastu Devi’ whereas in the certificate name mentioned was Masto Devi.
6. According to petitioner, she immediately approached the school authorities for correction of name in certificate and school authorities, after verifying the record, issued another certificate with corrected name as ‘Mastu Devi’ copy whereof has been placed on record as Annexure A-3 and the same was submitted by her to respondent No. 4 in April, 2015, but he refused to take the said certificate on record with direction to submit it with respondent No. 3, but respondent No. 3 also refused to accept the same and, therefore, she sent it through Speed Post.
7. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that as provided under Rule 7.1 (2) and (3) of Himachal Pradesh Financial Rules, 1971, petitioner had asked for correction of her date of birth within two years period of date of her entry in the Government Service and, therefore, it has been claimed that petitioner was entitled for correction of date of birth entries in her service record.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner to substantiate claim of the petitioner for correction of date of birth as well as payment of emoluments for her extended period of service, has relied upon Cement Corporation of India vs. Raghbir Singh and Another, AIR 2002 SC 509, R.K. Jangra vs. State of Punjab and Others, 2009 AIR SCW 3369, CIDCO vs. Vasudha Gorakhnath Mandevlekar, (2009) 7 SCC 283 and Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and Others vs. Chhota Birsa Uranw, 2015 (4) SLR 497 (SC).
9. In response to the petition, it has been submitted on behalf of resp
There was erasing in Register of Gram Panchyat for showing date of birth on right hand side of register without there being any corresponding entry.
Requests for correction of date of birth in service records made at the end of service are not sustainable unless made within prescribed time limits and with clear evidence of error.
Passing a decree by the Civil Court against the Education Board, directing correction of date of birth in certificate issued by the School Board, does not entitle the person for correction of entries....
Applications for correction of date of birth in service records must be timely; delay can invalidate claims, even with evidence.
The court emphasized the importance of evidence and approval for any alterations made in official records, especially regarding personal details such as date of birth.
The date of birth recorded in the HSC pass certificate should be taken as conclusive for all purposes, overriding earlier recorded dates in service records, particularly when the employee has consist....
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
