IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
M. Sanjeeva Reddy - Petitioner
Versus
T.S.R.T.C. and others - Respondents
W.P. No. 6199 of 2019
Decided On : 09-02-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles of 14 16 and 21 - Right to Information Act, 2005 - APSRTC Employees (Service) Regulation 1963 - Regulation 19 - Correcting date of birth in service record - Age of superannuation - Prayer declaring impugned action of respondents in correcting petitioners date of birth in service record as illegal arbitrary and direct respondents to continue petitioner in service till date petitioner would be reaching superannuation age of 58 years along with all consequential benefits in interests of justice and fair play - Held, Petitioner through his detailed legal notice addressed to Respondents that Petitioner's date of birth cannot be altered and requested Respondents to continue Petitioner in service based on date of birth recorded earlier - In respect to a medical certificate issued to an employee declaring him or her as fit and in view of fact that Petitioner is due to retir on attaining age of superannuation as per his date of birth - Petitions allowed.
ORDER :
Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent.
2. The Petitioner filed this petition seeking Writ of Mandamus with prayer is as follows :
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows :
(b) The petitioner’s date of birth as borne in Transfer Certificate is 01.06.1968 and the same has been recorded in petitioner’s service record and all other forms submitted, which were certified by the concerned officer. Even the Employment Card registered vide registration no. R1/88715691, the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 01.06.1968.
(c) Without any notice or without any valid reasons, the date of birth of the petitioner has been changed from 01.06.1968 to 15.03.1963 in the P.F. Slips issued for the year 2017-2018 and hence the petitioner made a representation to the 2nd respondent requesting to correct the date of birth as 01.06.1968 but to no avail.
(d) The Petitioner then made a representation to the 3rd respondent dated 27.07.2018 under the Right to Information Act but no reply had been received and hence the Petitioner made another representation on 06.12.2018 and the 3rd respondent furnished a reply through his letter dated 10.12.2018.
(e) Apart from the letter and other documents, Service record has also been furnished and upon perusal, petitioner has observed that the date of birth of the petitioner has been changed from 01.06.1968 to 15.03.1963 by following the Medical Certificate dtd15.03.1991. The Medical Officer has examined the petitioner in respect of physical fitness and not in respect of age proof as per the records in Service Certificate.
(f) The Respondents, having accepted the petitioner’s date of birth as 01.06.1968 without any dispute for more than 25 years and changing the same without any intimation is illegal and without jurisdiction. The competent authority overseeing such changes is the 1st respondent and the Service record submitted by the respondents changing the date of birth of the petitioner has not been signed by the competent authority (i.e., 1st respondent herein). 1st respondent has been employing such illegal and unfair labour methods to terminate/eliminate senior employees like the petitioner, so as to avoid paying of salaries.
(g) Since there was no reply to the representation dated 30.05.2018 of the petitioner by the 2nd respondent, petitioner got issued a notice through advocate dated 11.01.2019 bringing all the above facts and requesting to continue the petitioner till the petitioner had reached the age of superannuation i.e., 30.06.2026, for which there was no reply from the respondents and if the same is not considered, the petitioner would be retired five years earlier than the original service. Hence, the Writ Petition is filed.
4. Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondents, paras No.5, 7 and 9 read as under :
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for irrefutable proof and timely requests for correction of date of birth in service records, as well as the limitations on seeking....
Requests for correction of date of birth in service records made at the end of service are not sustainable unless made within prescribed time limits and with clear evidence of error.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that requests for correction of date of birth at the fag end of a career must be supported by irrefutable proof and evidence of real injustice, and....
Correction of date of birth in service records is not a matter of right and is subject to procedural and timely constraints, particularly if raised at the fag end of service.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.