The court confirmed that a government servant's date of birth in service records governs retirement rights, and requests for changes must be made within legally established time limits, regardless of proof supporting the correction.

JUDGMENT :

KRISHNA SHRIPAD DIXIT, J.

1. This Appeal by the State & its officials seeks to call in question a learned Single Judge’s order dated 18.10.2023 whereby Respondent’s W.P.(C) No.23169 of 2023 having been favoured, the order dated 27.12.2022 made by Appellants herein superannuating her on 10.10.2023 has been quashed. A direction has also been issued to the Appellants herein to continue her in service till she attains retirement age on the basis of her date of birth as entered in the Matriculation Certificate, i.e, ‘10.10.1965’. In other words, the other date, namely, ‘10.10.1963’ allegedly entered in the Service Register wrongly is to be ignored.

2. Learned AGA Mr.Jee representing the Appellants vehemently argues that the date ’10.10.1963’ was entered in the Service Register on the instruction given by the Respondent-employee herself; the said entry continued throughout; her request for alteration of the date of birth in the Service Register having been made belatedly was rightly rejected in terms of the extant Rules; that being the position, learned Single Judge grossly erred in granting relief to the Respondent.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent makes submission with equal vehemence in justification of the reasoning of learned Single Judge. He contends that the five year period of limitation for seeking alteration in the entry of date of birth in the Service Register has to be reckoned not from the date of entry into service, but from the date the services of his client came to be regularized; if that is done, the application is in time. He also relies upon a Ruling of the Apex Court that the date of birth as mentioned in the Matriculation Certificate should be as genuine for all practical purposes.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Appeal papers, we are inclined to grant indulgence in the matter for the following reasons.

4.1. Respondent gained entry to the service on 15.07.2003 although not on regular basis. At the time of entry, she had admittedly furnished ‘10.10.1963’ as her date of birth and accordingly, entry was made in the Service Register, that existed throughout. When the superannuation order dated 10.10.2023 was served on her, she had represented seeking change of entry of date of birth to 10.10.1965 on the basis of her Matriculation Certificate. That request was not met with positive response on the ground that it was time barred in terms of Rule 65 (a) of Code.

4.2. The entry point of service whether regular, irregular or otherwise is the focal point of Rule 65 of Odisha Civil Services, Code. The said rule reads as under:

“Every person on entering Government service shall declare his/her date of birth which shall not differ from any such declaration expressed or implied for any public purpose before entering service. The date of birth shall be supported by documentary evidence such as Matriculation Certificate, Municipal Birth Certificate and entered in his/her service record. No alteration of the date of birth of Government servant shall be made except 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) Filled after five years of entry into Government service, or (b) The change would so lower the applicants age that he/ she would have been ineligible to appear in any of the academic or recruitment examinations in which he/she had appeared or for consideration for appointment to any service or post under the Government.”

The Rule employs the expression “entering the Government service” and does not say “entering the Government service on regular basis”. It is the employee, regardless of his/her status who would declare what his/