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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 2227

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
R. Sheik – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, Kancheepuram Municipality Kancheepuram. – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1727 of 2020 & WMP. Nos. 1998 & 1999 of 2020
Decided On : 28-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Illamvaludhi, Advpcate. For the Respondent:G.B. Rajesh, Advocate.

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.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - Date of Birth Alteration - 05.04.1960, 05.04.1962 - The petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Supervisor on compassionate ground on the demise of his father in 1988. The date of birth in the service register was altered from 05.04.1960 to 05.04.1962 without evidence of approval or endorsement. The court found that the petitioner's conduct was not good and confirmed the respondent's order.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Supervisor on compassionate ground on the demise of his father in 1988. The petitioner's date of birth in the service register was altered from 05.04.1960 to 05.04.1962 without evidence of approval or endorsement. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the alteration.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the conduct of the petitioner was not good and confirmed the respondent's order. The details provided by the school regarding the petitioner's name and date of birth proved that the date of birth was 05.04.1960 and not 05.04.1962 as corrected in the service register.

Issues: The main issue was the alteration of the petitioner's date of birth in the service register without evidence of approval or endorsement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the details provided by the school regarding the petitioner's name and date of birth to conclude that the date of birth was 05.04.1960 and not 05.04.1962 as corrected in the service register.

Final Decision: The court confirmed the respondent's order and dismissed the writ petition.

JUDGMENT

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records connected with the proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.7744/2019/H1 dated 19.08.2019 passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to produce the petitioner''s school certificates which was produced by the petitioner at the time of appointment.)

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking to call for the records connected with the proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.7744/2019/H1 dated 19.08.2019 passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to produce the petitioner''s school certificates which was produced by the petitioner at the time of appointment.

2. The facts of the case in a nutshell:-

2.1 The petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Supervisor on compassionate ground on the demise of his father namely Razak by the proceedings of the Executive Officer, Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Vandavasi by his proceedings issued in 1258/88/A1 dated 08.07.1988 and joined in the said office on 13.07.1988. While joining the duty, the petitioner has surrendered his school certificate and that was accepted by the Executive Officer, Vandavasi Town Panchayat and he has studied upto 8th std in Sannathi School of Vandavasi and his date of birth also mentioned as in the School records as 05.04.1962. The respondent issued a memo on 19.08.2019 by his proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.7744/2019/H1 that in the petitioner''s service register the date of birth has been mentioned as 05.04.1960 whereas it was altered as 1962 and the alteration made in service register does not reflect who has done so. Challenging the above order dated 19.08.2019 the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that at the time of joining, the petitioner''s date of birth and name as per the School records is 05.04.1962, R.Sheik and his father''s name is P. Razak Maraickkayar and the same has been entered in the service register at the time of joining in Vandavasi Town Panchayat. The learned counsel further submitted that at the time of retirement of the petitioner, while preparing the list of retirees in the year 2020 and while verifying the relevant service register of the retirees it was found in the service register at first page the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 05.04.1960 but subsequently it was changed as 1962 by pen and even in the second page of the service register it is changed from 1960 to 1962 even in numerical and in words and the same done by different pen and this correction took place when and on what basis there is no detail available and there is no endorsement by the superior officer for the correction made. Hence the petitioner''s date of birth is taken as 05.04.1960 and the date of retirement is declared as 30.04.2020. If at all any person wants to make change in the date of birth it has to be done within 5 years period as per the Government Rules from the date of joining the service and in the instant case the petitioner has joined the service on 13.07.1988 but he has not given any application for correction in the date of birth till his retirement. Hence the correction in the date of birth cannot be done without the approval of the superior authority and the correction made in the service register of the petitioner cannot be accepted and based on his date of birth, the petitioner''s date of birth is taken as 05.04.1960 and the retirement date will be 30.04.2020. Subsequently the petitioner also gave a representation dated 24.08.2019 to the Commissioner, Kancheepuram Municipality, Kancheepuram to produce the school records which was produced by him at the time of appointment, since he was working there as on the date of impugned order dated 19.08.2019 and the petitioner also gave another representation dated 05.09.2019 requesting the r

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top