Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
Dr. O.Mathivanan – Appellant
Versus
The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner Revenue Administration and Disaster Management – Respondent
W.P.Nos.14639, 14640 & 14642 of 2019 and WMP.Nos.14638, 14689 & 14641 of 2019
Decided on : 25-07-2022
Date of Birth - University Service - Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 - [Section 12] - [Section 7(c) of University Calendar Vol.I] - The court discussed the correction of date of birth in the service register of the petitioner, the role of the Commissioner of Revenue Administration, and the application of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969. The court found that the claim made by the petitioner regarding his date of birth was genuine and should have been accepted. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the Director of Government Examinations to correct the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. book of the petitioner and restore the original date of birth in the service register.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a lecturer at the University of Madras, challenged the correction of his date of birth in the service register, which led to his premature retirement. The University had corrected the date of birth from 08.01.1961 to 02.04.1959, triggering a series of legal actions and orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's claim regarding his date of birth was genuine and should have been accepted. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the correction of the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. book and the service register.
Issues: The issues revolved around the correction of the petitioner's date of birth in the service register, the role of the Commissioner of Revenue Administration, and the application of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the claim made by the petitioner regarding his date of birth was genuine and should have been accepted. The court directed the correction of the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. book and the service register.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned order and directed the Director of Government Examinations to correct the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. book of the petitioner and restore the original date of birth in the service register.
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned letters Official Communications No.D1(B) TE/2019/376, dated 29.04.2019, No.R.A3(3)/43844/2016 dated 18.03.2019, and No.D1(A) TE/20145/574 dated 27.05.2014 issued by the second respondent and consequential official communication No.D1(B)/TE/2019/265 dated 28.03.2019 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to permit the petitioner to continue his service as per his original date of birth i.e., 08.01.1961.
Since the issue raised in these writ petitions is one and the same and are interconnected and all these writ petitions are filed by the same petitioner, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for both sides, these writ petitions were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Tamil, in the Department of Tamil Institute of Correspondence Education in the University of Madras on 21.12.2000 vide order of the University dated 21.12.2000.
3. At the time of appointment i.e., when the petitioner entering into service to the University, the petitioner's date of birth, according to the petitioner, was correctly recorded in the service register of the petitioner as 08.01.1961, which is as per the Birth Certificate issued by the concerned authority under section 12 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969 [in short, “the Act”] as well as the transfer certificate issued by the institution, where the petitioner had studied.
4. After 13 long years of service, the University had sent a communication on 27.05.2014 informing the petitioner that the date of birth of the petitioner in the entries of the Service Register of the University has been corrected as 02.04.1959 as per the S.S.L.C book by invoking statute 7(c) of Chapter IX of the University Calendar Vol.I, which according to the petitioner is without notice and thereby the principle of natural justice is violated. Challenging the said order dated 27.05.2014, the writ petition in W.P.No.14642 of 2019 has been filed.
5. After the said order was passed, where suo motu the University had corrected the date of birth of the petitioner from 08.01.1961 to 02.04.1959, it triggered the petitioner to go before the Educational Authority viz., the Director of School Education as well as the Director of Government Examinations, where the petitioner had made application to correct the date of birth of the petitioner in the S.S.L.C. book, where it had entered as 02.04.1959 instead of 08.01.1961.
6. The said request made by the petitioner since was not immediately considered and it had been kept pending by the School Authorities, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.39184 of 2015, where a final order was passed by a learned judge of this Court by order dated 21.03.2016 by giving a direction to the Director of School Education as well as the Director of Government Examinations to consider the representation/application of the petitioner dated 29.10.2015 and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame.
7. Pursuant to the said order passed by this Court, the Director of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, by proceedings dated 29.07.2016 has returned the proposal or application submitted by the petitioner by directing the petitioner to approach the employer of the petitioner i.e., University from whom the petitioner's application to change the date of birth shall emanate and ultimately it must reach the Director of Government Examinations through the Commissioner of Revenue Administration. The relevant portion of the order of the Director of School Education dated 29.07.2016 reads thus:
8. Pursuant to the said proceedings issued by the Director of School Education, the petitioner made the request to the Commissioner of Revenue Administration, who in turn directed the
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the claim made by the petitioner regarding his date of birth was genuine and should have been accepted, leading to the correction of the date ....
The date of birth recorded in the High School certificate at the time of entry into government service is final for the purposes of service benefits, and no application for correction of the date of ....
Applications for correction of date of birth in service records must be timely; delay can invalidate claims, even with evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application and interpretation of II No.76 in reviewing and determining the date of birth for existing employees, and the onus on the petiti....
The request for correction of date of birth in Government service should be made within the stipulated period of five years from the entry into that particular service, and an inordinate delay in see....
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
