SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 8297

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA


Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction


Appellate Side


W.P.A. 11453 of 2025


Gangadhar Mondal


Vs.


Union of India & Ors.


For the petitioner : Mr. Uttiya Ray, Advocate


Ms. Anima Maiti, Advocate


For respondent no. 1 : Ms. Sabita Roy, Advocate


For respondent nos. 2 to 4 : Mr. Pratik Majumder, Advocate


Present:


The Hon’ble Justice Aniruddha Roy


Heard on : June 25, 2025


Judgment on : June 25, 2025

Aniruddha Roy, J.

1. This is a hearing matter upon exchange of affidavits. The urgency is that the petitioner shall retire from his service on June 30, 2025 and the challenge thrown by the petitioner would have a significant and consequential effect on his retirement.

2. On the prayer of Mr. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 to 4 affidavit-in-opposition filed in Court today, is taken on record.

3. Identically on the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner the affidavit-in-reply filed in Court today is taken on record.

Facts:

4. The petitioner has been working as a Group C employee of the respondent no. 2 (for short, D.V.C.). He was appointed by virtue of an appointment offer dated June 19, 1995 at page 14 to the writ petition. This was a compassionate appointment. The relevant Transfer Certificate issued by the concerned school dated January 12, 1987 submitted by the petitioner, for obtaining the appointment in support of his age proof, mentioned the date of birth of the petitioner being December 10, 1968, at page 20 to the writ petition. However, the said Transfer Certificate was not found to be attested/countersigned by the District Education Officer, as was required under the specific provision for appointment.

5. In absence of the said attestation/countersignature by the District Education Officer following the provisions laid down under clause 2 of the interview letter issued to the petitioner dated April 25, 1995 at page 13 to the writ petition, he was asked to appear before the medical board for the purpose of assessment of age. After examination by the medical board, the medical department of D.V.C. issued a report dated June 12, 1995 wherein the petitioner was assessed to be 30 years old, at page 17 to the writ petition.

6. On the basis of the said medical board report the appointment letter was issued and the petitioner was appointed for the post.

7. On September 6, 1999 the petitioner after causing the said Transfer Certificate issued by the school dated January 12, 1987 to be attested/countersigned by the District Education Officer being the jurisdictional District Inspector of Schools and on the basis of the same the petitioner submitted an application before D.V.C. for correction of his date of birth as December 10, 1968 in place and stead of June 13, 1965, as recorded in the Service Book on the basis of the said medical board report whereupon the appointment letter was issued. An office order in this regard dated March 3, 1998 issued by D.V.C. is available at page 18 to the writ petition.

8. On or about August 7, 2019 D.V.C. has issued an identity card in favour of the petitioner showing his date of birth to be December 10, 1968, annexure P-4 at page 21 to the writ petition.

9. Since after the said application submitted on September 6, 1999 no step was taken by the petitioner for correction of his alleged date of birth and the petitioner on March 15, 2023, annexure P-5 at page 22 to the writ petition, submitted a further application seeking rectification of his date of birth. In support, the petitioner has also submitted an affidavit sworn before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Asansol at page 23 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also

produced his Aadhaar Card and the Voter Identity Card and the relevant PAN Card at pages 25 and 26 to the writ petition and page 15 to the affidavit-in-reply.

10. The petitioner then submitted diverse applications in June 20, 2024 under the Right to Information Act before D.V.C. seeking information with regard to the fate of his applications for rectification of his date of birth. The proceeding had travelled up to the appellate authority under the Right to Information Act. Finally, the reply sent by the appropriate authority of D.V.C. dated November 21, 2024 at page 39 to the writ petition, furnished the relevant information with regard to the information sought for by the petitioner. The information provided to the petitioner that the request of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top