The court emphasized the importance of uncontroverted evidence and the recommendation by departmental authorities in determining the correct date of birth for service purposes.

R.S.Mongia, J.

1. Written statement on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 6 filed in Court. Taken on record. Copy furnished to the counsel for the petitioner.

2. The controversy which arises in this case is as to whether the date of birth of the petitioner is 11.3.1943 or 11.3.1948. Normally, this Court does not enter into such controversy and leave it to the person claiming a different date of birth to get the same settled from a Civil Court. However, in case there is uncontroverted evidence, which on the face of the record shows a particular date of birth, we see no harm in exercising our jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

3. In the present case, when the petitioner entered into service, he is stated to have given a certificate duly attested by the Principal, H.A.V. Inter College, Saha-ranpur, dated 10.12.1969 which showed his date of birth as 11.3..1948. Petitioner has placed on record a photostat copy of the same which certificate was attested by a particular S.D.O. who had made entries in the service book of the petitioner. In the service book, the date entered is 11.3.1943. No doubt, the service book is signed by the petitioner himself. The peti- tioner is stated to have made a representation to the Superintending Engineer that in fact wrong date of birth had been entered in the service book and the same should be corrected. This was way back in the year 1991. The Superintending Engineer wrote to the Executive Engineer, YNR Tubewell Division, MITC, Yamuna Nagar, to make enquiry into the matter. Enquiry was made and it was found that in fact petitioners date of birth is 11.3.1948 and it had been wrongly entered as 11.3.1943. The Executive Engineer wrote to Sub-Divisional Officer, Augmentation Tubewell Sub-Division, Yamunanagar, on 30.4.1991 (and the copy of that letter was endorsed to the Superintending Engineer) that on enquiry it had been found that the correct date of birth of the petitioner is 11.3.1948. A copy of that letter is appended as An-nexure P-6 to the writ petition, which reads as under :-

HARYANA STATE MINOR IRRIGATION AND TUBEWELLS CORPORATION LIMITED.

No. 1937-38/30-E Date : 30.4.1991

To

The Sub Divisional Officer,

Aug. Tubewel! Sub-Division,

M.I.T.C., Yamuna Nagar.

Subject : Change of date of Birth of Sh. Amar Nath, T.W.O.

On verification of concerned record and as per report of the Principal,

H.A.V., Inter College, Saharan-pur, it has been found the date of Birth of

Shri Amar Nath, T.W.O. is 11.3.1948 which has been mentioned in the Service

Book as 11.3.1943 inadvertently by the then S.D.O. The entry of Date of Birth

be corrected as 11.3.1948 in the Service Book. The copies of the

Certificate/report of the Principal, H.A.V. Inter College, Saharanpur be

pasted in the Service Book for record.

Sd/- Executive Engineer,

YNR Tubewelt Division, MITC,

Yamunanagar,

29.4.1991.

CC:-

The Superintending Engineer, Tubewell, Circle, MITC, Ambala for information

w.r.t. his letter No. 1764/9Edt. 12.4.1991. The date of birth of the operator

has been corrected after full enquiry satisfaction as desired vide your above

mentioned letter. The change may kindly be got done in the seniority list of

T. W.Os.

4 It will be apparent from the above that the departmental authorities, on verification, had found that the correct date of birth of the petitioner is 11.3.1948. It was further recommended that necessary correction be made in the service book for all purposes. We have also perused the photostat copy of the certificate mentioning the petitioners date of birth which was attested by the S.D.O. who made entries in the service book. We are of the view that petitioner was not to gain anything if he had not mentioned his date of birth as 11.3.1948. Even by mentioning the date of birth as 11.3.1948, he was not under-age. The petitioner did not stand to gain in any manner by mentioning 11.3.1943 as his date of birth. There seems to be obvious mistake in making entry in the