Back
2020 Supreme(Mad) 2054
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SUBBIAH & C. SARAVANAN, JJ.
The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary to Government Home (Police-1A) Department Secretariat, Chennai & Others – Appellant
Versus
M.T. Ganeshmoorthy, I.P.S. & Another – Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 781 of 2019 & C.M.P.No.6179 of 2019
Decided On : 09-10-2020
For the Appellants :P.H. Aravindh Pandian, Additional Advocate General assisted by A. Srijayanthi, Special Government Pleader
For the Respondents:V. Karthic, Senior Advocate, K. Aswini Devi, Ganesan Muthuraman, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application for alteration of date of birth in Government Service should be made within five years of entering a particular service, and the Birth Certificate issued by the competent authority holds significant weight in proving the date of birth.
Headnote:
Alteration of Date of Birth - Government Service - Rule 49 of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules - Birth Certificate - Application submitted within five years of joining the Police Department - Rejection of application - Writ petition allowed by the learned Single Judge - Writ Appeal dismissed by the Division Bench
Fact of the Case:
The first respondent joined as Junior Assistant in the Directorate of Motor Vehicle Maintenance Department, Madras on 28.12.1984. He subsequently held various positions and is currently working as Deputy Inspector General of Police, Crime Branch CID, Chennai. He sought alteration of his date of birth from 20.10.1961 to 10.10.1962 in his service records, based on a Birth Certificate issued by the Corporation of Chennai. His application for alteration of date of birth was rejected by the appellants, leading to the filing of a writ petition before the learned Single Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, stating that the application for alteration of date of birth was made within five years of joining the Police Department, and the Birth Certificate produced by the first respondent was not seriously disputed. The Court held that the rejection of the application was not warranted, and the claim of the first respondent was valid.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the first respondent's application for alteration of date of birth by the appellants, based on Rule 49 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules, and the validity of the Birth Certificate produced by the first respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Rule 49(b) of the said Rules, stating that the application for alteration of date of birth should be made within five years of entering a particular service, and not from the first appointment in Government Service. The Court also emphasized the significance of the Birth Certificate issued by the competent Birth and Death Registration Authority, stating that it outweighs other documents in proving the date of birth.
Final Decision: The Division Bench confirmed the Order passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the Writ Appeal and allowing the writ petition filed by the first respondent. The Court declined to interfere with the decision of the learned Single Judge.
JUDGMENT :
R. Subbiah, J
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 23.04.2018 passed in W.P. No. 29669 of 2014 on the file of this Court.)
1. The respondents 1 to 3 in W.P.No.29669 of 2014 before the learned Single Judge, are the appellants in this appeal. The first respondent herein has filed the said writ petition before the learned Single Judge to set aside the order passed in G.O.Ms.No.75, Home (Police-2) Department, dated 08.04.1996, issued by the first appellant and the consequential letter bearing reference No.20212/Pol.1A/2005 dated 24.05.2006 issued by the first appellant and for a consequential direction to the respondents in the writ petition to alter his date of birth as 10.10.1962 in his service records. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on 23.04.2018, against which, this writ appeal is filed by the appellants/respondents 1 to 3 in the writ petition.
2. For the purpose of disposal of this appeal, certain facts are required to be considered and they are elucidated hereinbelow.
3. The first respondent/writ petitioner herein joined as Junior Assistant in the Directorate of Motor Vehicle Maintenance Department, Madras on 28.12.1984. In such employment, he continued till 15.07.1986. Subsequently, he was relieved from the said post and joined the post of Senior Inspector in the Co-operative Societies, Madras on 16.07.1986, from which post, he was relieved on 24.01.1990. On 25.01.1990, he joined as Junior Employment Officer in Anna Nagar, Madras and continued till 15.12.1991. Again, he was relieved from the post of Junior Employment Officer and he joined the Police Department on 16.12.1991 as Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category-I). Subsequently, on 21.05.2003, the first respondent/writ petitioner was given promotion under the Indian Police Service. As on date, he is working as Deputy Inspector General of Police, Crime Branch CID, Chennai and he is set to retire in the year 2021.
4. According to the first respondent/writ petitioner, during the course of his employment in Police Department, he came to know that his date of birth had been erroneously entered in his educational records as 20.10.1961, which had been reflected in his service records as well. On the contrary, his actual date of birth is 10.10.1962 which was duly registered in the records of the Corporation of Chennai. On coming to know of the incorrect date of birth entered into his service records, the first respondent/writ petitioner submitted an application dated 30.06.1993 through the District Superintendent of Police, Tuticorin District and sought for alteration of his date of birth. This application of the first respondent/writ petitioner for alteration of date of birth was rejected by the first appellant/State, by issuing G.O.Ms.No.75, Home (Police 2) Department, dated 08.04.1996. As against the order of rejection, the first respondent/writ petitioner filed a Review Petition to the Government and it was also rejected by order dated 24.05.2006. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the writ petition was filed before the Writ Court.
5. (i). According to the first respondent/writ petitioner, he was born on 10.10.1962 at Women and Children Hospital, Egmore, Chennai to his parents Mr.Thirugnanasambandam (late) and Mrs.Meenakshi. His birth was duly registered with the Corporation of Chennai on 14.11.1962, vide Registration No.491. It is stated that the first respondent/writ petitioner is the fourth son born to his parents. According to the first respondent/writ petitioner, his parents were blessed with 4 sons (including the first respondent/writ petitioner herein) and 2 daughters. The following are the birth details of the first respondent/writ petitioner and his brothers and sisters, as culled out from the affidavit, dated 02.10.2014 filed in support of the writ petition, i.e. W.P.No.29669 of 2014 :
(1) The first son, namely M.T.Palaniappan, was born on 08.05.1956 and his birth was registered on 23.0
