Back
2003 Supreme(All) 1649
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R.B.Misra
SURENDRA TEWARI
Versus
STATE OF U P
Decided On : 07 August 2003
C. M. W. P. No. 21105 of 1992
ANIL KUMAR MISHRA, J.P.Singh, M.D.Singh Shekar, S.S.SHARMA,
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the date of birth entered in the service book should be considered correct unless strong documentary evidence showing otherwise is produced. The court also emphasized the importance of not entertaining applications for correction of date of birth at a belated stage, especially on the eve of superannuation.
Headnote:
Date of Birth - Correction of Date of Birth - U. P. Recruitment to Service (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1947, - The court discussed various cases related to the correction of date of birth and emphasized that the date of birth entered in the service book should be considered correct unless strong documentary evidence showing otherwise is produced. The court also highlighted the importance of not entertaining applications for correction of date of birth at a belated stage, especially on the eve of superannuation. It further emphasized that disputed questions of fact for changing the date of birth should be adjudicated in trial courts through suits, with the production of relevant medical tests and other evidences.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Collection Peon in District Azamgarh, sought to correct his date of birth after being retired. He claimed that his date of birth was incorrectly recorded and provided various documents to support his claim. The authorities rejected his representation, leading to the filing of a writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's date of birth as entered in the service book should be considered correct, and his retirement was correctly made based on that date of birth. The court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the petitioner's retiral benefit treating his date of birth as 19-6-1929 as entered into the service book.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the correction of the petitioner's date of birth and his entitlement to retiral benefits based on the claimed date of birth.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the date of birth entered in the service book should be considered correct unless strong documentary evidence showing otherwise is produced. It also highlighted the importance of not entertaining applications for correction of date of birth at a belated stage, especially on the eve of superannuation. The court further emphasized that disputed questions of fact for changing the date of birth should be adjudicated in trial courts through suits, with the production of relevant medical tests and other evidences.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was entitled to get his retiral benefit treating his date of birth as 19-6-1929 as entered into the service book.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. S. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
In this petition prayer has been made to quash the order dated 10-2-1992 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance), Azamgarh, whereby the petitioners representation dated 27-12-1991 rendered before the respondent authority in the light of the order dated 13-12-1991 of the High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 10930 of 1989 was rejected and the petitioner was directed to receive the post retiral benefits considering him to be retired.
2. It appears that the petitioner was not matriculate/high School pass, working as Collection Peon in District Azamgarh and had got his date of birth as 19-6-1929 entered in the service book on his statement and assertion, which was duly verified from time to time by him as the service book was in Hindi, was recorded whereas the petitioner claimed to record his date of birth on 4-5-1932. However, taking 19-6-1929 as the true date of birth completing 60 years of age the petitioner was retired on 30-6- 1989. According to the petitioner he came to know only in the month of June 1989 that he was going to retire, therefore, he gave application and representation to the respondents referring the case of one Sri Raj Narain Mishra, who was also a collection peon and on whose representation his date of birth was corrected even at the fag end of the career. Petitioner for the purpose for getting the date of birth corrected had filed school leaving certificate from Junior Basic Vidyalaya, which he had not earlier submitted even during the service period and on the basis of the certificate the petitioner claimed for alteration and correction of the date of birth. However, the petitioner was retired on 30-6-1989, thereafter he filed writ petition namely Writ Petition No. 10930 of 1989, which was disposed of on 13- 12-1991 with a direction to the authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner and decide the same within stipulated time. While disposing of the petition in the order dated 13-12-1991 this Court has already observed that this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot go into the disputed question of fact i. e. after adjudicating to decide the disputed question of date of birth. In the light of the order dated 13-12-1991 the representation of the petitioner was considered by the Officer In-charge (Collection), Azamgarh and the same was rejected as indicated above. In the present writ petition the said order is challenged by saying that no analysis has been made and no reason has been given by the authority concerned before rejecting the representation on 10-2- 1992 the evidences have not been considered led by the petitioner as school leaving certificate, medical certificate and other documents namely certificate of primary school. According to the petitioner the impugned order dated 10-2-1992 has been passed by the respondents in arbitrary and mechanical manner, without application of mind and the authorities concerned have also not considered that one Sri Raj Narain Mishra, Collection Peon, got his date of birth corrected even at the fag end of the career. According to the petitioner he had always served with sincerity and devotion and by not correcting the date of birth as claimed by him the authority concerned is depriving him from the livelihood and debarring him to work for the remaining period in service.
3. The counter affidavit has been filed, according to which on the statement of petitioner the date of birth was entered into service book prepared in Hindi, which was duly verified time and again and the signature and attestation was also made by the petitioner. The petitioner has earlier never bothered to indicate or request for change of his date of birth during his service period and at the fag end of the career, even if while entering into th
