Applications for alteration of date of birth after five years should not be entertained, especially at the fag end of the service career, as per the notification and legal precedents.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3. This Writ Petition has been filed for correction of the date of birth from 01.02.1963 to 01.02.1965 which has been wrongly recorded in the Petitioner’s service book entry.

4. The Petitioner is currently employed as a peon in the Dinapadma High School, Baghamund, in the district of Bolangir and has made representations that his date of birth has been wrongly recorded as 01.02.1963 instead of 01.02.1965. Moreover, he has also submitted that the date of birth in the Govt. UP School Admission Register and the Aadhar Card is recorded as 01.02.1965 whereas it is mentioned as 01.02.1963 in the service book and school leaving certificate.

5. It is argued on behalf of learned counsel for the Petitioner that if the date of birth of the Petitioner is not subjected to correction within optimal amount of time, then the Petitioner will face the problem of premature retirement and irreparable loss & injury.

6. In this regard we must stress upon the notification (No.2102 – 2R/1-27/94-Gen) that has been issued by the Government of Orissa. The relevant part of the notification dated 30th January, 1995 issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Orissa, is set out as under:

“(i) No alternation of the date of birth once recorded in the Service Book/Service Roll of an employee, shall be made excepting in case of clerical error without prior approval of the State Government. An application for effecting a change in the date of birth shall be summarily rejected if-

a) filed after five years of entry into Government service, or

b) the change would lower the applicant’s age to an extent that he/she would have been ineligible to appear in any of the academic or recruitment examination for appointment to any service or post under the Government.”

7. Indisputably, in the case at hand, the application that has been made by the Petitioner is time barred and was not filed within five years from the date of joining. In the instant case, according to the Notification dated 30th January, 1995, it is made clear that no alteration of the entry should be allowed after five years.

8. Apart from the notification and the said guidelines, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of cases have categorically laid down that the employees should not be permitted to change the date of birth at the fag end of their service career. In the instant case the application of alteration has been filed at the fag end of the Petitioner’s service career.

9. In State of Tamil Nadu Vs. T.V. Venugopalan, 1994 SCC (6) 302 , the Hon’ble Apex court was clearly of the opinion that the Government servant should not be permitted to correct the date of birth at the fag end of his service career. The Hon’ble Court, in very strong terms, observed as under:

".....The government servant having declared his date of birth as entered in the service register to be correct, would not be permitted at the fag end of his service career to raise a dispute as regards the correctness of the entries in the service register.

It is common phenomenon that just before superannuation, an application would be made to the Tribunal or Court just to gain time to continue in service and the Tribunal or courts are unfortunately unduly liberal in entertaining and allowing the government employees or public employees to remain in office, which is adding an impetus to resort to the fabrication of the record and place reliance thereon and seek the authority to correct it. When rejected, on grounds of technicalities, question them and remain in office till the period claimed for, gets expired. This case is one such stark instance. Accordingly, in our view, the Tribunal has grossly erred in showing overindulgence in granting the reliefs even trenching beyond its powers of allowing him to remain in office for two years after his date of superannuation even as per his