The importance of following the rules and regulations of the employer regarding the alteration of date of birth in service records and the significance of documentary evidence as proof of date of birth.

The 3rd defendant in O.S.No.482/1992 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Pollachi, who has succeeded in his defence, lost the same in the appeal preferred by the plaintiff in A.s.No.12/1995 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Udumalpet, is the appellant herein. The plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No.482/1992 for declaration that his date of birth is 20.8.1964 and also for consequential mandatory injunction directing the 3rd defendant/appellant herein to correct the date of birth of the plaintiff in his service register as 20.8.1964 in stead of 13. 1963.

2. The averments in the plaint in brief relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal are as follows:-

2(a) The plaintiff is the second son of his father Ramasamy Gounder and mother Rathinam. The plaintiffs elder brother was born on 111. 1961 and the plaintiffs younger brother was born on 111. 1967. The plaintiff studied in Nachimuthu Polytechnic during 1976-1982. Thereafter he pursued his studies in Institute of Technology at Coimbatore from1982 to 1986 and he became a graduate in engineering.

Thereafter the plaintiff joined in the D3s Corporation as an Assistant Engineer on 4. 1987. In all his school records, the plaintiffs date of birth has been wrongly mentioned as 13. 1963. The plaintiffs father is an illiterate, hence he gave the date of birth of the plaintiff as 13. 1963 instead of 20.8.1964. When the plaintiffs parents were making arrangements for the marriage of the plaintiff, through his horoscope the plaintiff came to know that his date of birth is 20.08.1964. When the plaintiff made a search in the Sub-Registrars office Pollachi in respect of the registration of his birth he came to know that there was no entry for his birth in the year 1963, but his birth was entered in the register for 1964 as his date of birth is 20.8.1964. A certificate has been issued to that effect by the Sub-Registrar. So the plaintiffs date of birth is 20.8.1964 and not 13. 1963. In the service register maintained in the D3s corporation also the plaintiffs date of birth has been wrongly entered as 13. 1963 on the basis of his date of birth recorded in the school register. The plaintiff has issued notice under Section 80 of CPC. The said notice was received by D1, who had instructed the plaintiff to take necessary steps through the relevant department. D3 has received the notice but has not chosen to send any reply. Hence, the suit.

3. The second defendant has filed his written statement which was adopted by the first defendant, which runs as follows:-

The suit is not maintainable at all on law or on facts. The plaintiff has joined in Nachimuthu Polytechnic Higher school on 7. 1996. while joining in the school his date of birth was given as 13. 1963. Only on the basis of a declaration given in the school certificate his date of birth has been entered into other registers like serve register etc., as 13. 1963. The Diploma certificate as well as transfer certificate has been issued to the plaintiff on 7. 1982 itself. In both the certificates his date of birth has been mentioned as 13. 1963. The contention of the plaintiff that only through his horoscope he came to know that his date of birth is 20.8.1964 cannot be sustainable. The plaintiff has left the school on 7. 1982 itself. Hence, after a long lapse of time the plaintiff is not entitled to ask for any correction of his date of birth in the service register. The plaintiff can claim mandatory injunction subject to the rules and regulations followed by the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. If the date of birth is corrected as 20.8.1964, the plaintiff will be in service for another 1½ years. After the plaintiff came to know about the date of birth from horoscope he has not approached the Neyveli Lignite Corporation (D3) to change his date of birth. The plaintiff has to take necessary steps before the appropriate department for the change of date of birth. Without resorting to the said course, the suit filed