Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6573

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J), Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Sunita – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi – Respondent
M.A No. 1825/2026|O.A. No. 1414/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Vineet Chauhan
For the Respondents: Mr. G. S. Oberoi with Mr. Ankur Sharma

A public servant cannot claim alteration of their date of birth in service records at the fag end of their service career, especially after decades of acquiescence to the existing records, as such belated requests are barred by delay, laches, and the need for administrative certainty.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Fundamental Rules - FR 56 - Correction of date of birth in service records - Plea for alteration at the fag end of service - Applicant served for approximately two decades without objection - Reliance on Employment Exchange Identity Card rejected - Legal position regarding correction of date of birth at superannuation reaffirmed. (Paras 1, 14-21)

(B) Service Law - Limitation and Laches - Principle of "Vigilantibus Non Dormientibus Jura Subveniunt" - Correction in service record after nineteen years of service is barred by delay - Request for alteration of records at the verge of superannuation is unsustainable. (Para 21)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, employed as a Safai Karamchari with the respondent since 2006, filed an O.A. seeking a correction in her date of birth from 29.06.1966 to 05.02.1970, claiming an arithmetic error in her initial medical certificate. She sought to extend her retirement date from 2026 to 2030. The respondents argued the claim was belated, occurring after nearly two decades of service, and maintained the official records based on her enrollment documents.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the applicant accepted the recorded date for nineteen years without objection and that such a claim at the fag end of service is an afterthought. The request was dismissed as being devoid of merit due to delay and laches.

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to correction of her date of birth after nearly 20 years of service based on an alleged clerical error in initial records.

Ratio Decidendi: Correction of the date of birth in service records cannot be permitted at the fag end of service, especially where the employee has acquiesced to the recorded date for decades, as such claims are barred by delay and lack conclusive supporting evidence.

Result: O.A. and M.A. dismissed.

ORDER

Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) :

The instant OA has been filed by the applicant under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:-

“A) Hereby, it is most humbly prayed: kindly may pass an order/directions to the respondent regard to the rectification in the retirement-year of the applicant in all the service records; thereby, the retirement year shall be effect/implement in the (year 2030).

B) Hereby, it is most humbly prayed: Kindly may pass order/directions to the respondent regard to shall treat the actual date of birth (05.02.1970) of the applicant same as mention in the Directorate Of Employment, Delhi Administration registered letter dated 10.02.1995.

C) Hereby, it is most humbly prayed; kindly may pass an order in-respect to grant the other benefits in favor of the applicant, kindly shall treat the actual date of birth of the applicant which is 05.02.1970 in all the service record for the assessment of the actual retirement year in accordance with the service record of the applicant, thereby the actual year of the retirement is 2030 not 2026.

D) Pass such other orders or reliefs as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favor of the applicant and against the respondent.”

The factual matrix of the case as per the counsel of the applicant is that the applicant is presently working as a “Regular Safai Karamchari” in Ward No. 13, Mukherjee Nagar (Civil Line Zone), Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). She has filed the present OA seeking correction of her date of birth and retirement year in her service records. According to the counsel, her correct date of birth is 05.02.1970. To support her contention the applicant relied upon her Employment Exchange Identity Card issued by the Directorate of Employment, Delhi Administration on 10.02.1995, wherein her date of birth is recorded as 05.02.1970. The applicant was selected for the post of Cleaning Staff by letter dated 12.04.1995 issued by the Delhi Sanitation and Sanitation Engineering Department. Thereafter, she was appointed as Safai Karamchari vide appointment order dated 28.06.2006 issued by the Administrative Officer, MCD, Town Hall, Delhi. On the same date i.e., 28.06.2006 the applicant was directed to undergo medical examination at MCD Dispensary, Azadpur. On 29.06.2006, the Chief Medical Officer declared her medically fit for service and in the said medical certificate, her date of birth was mentioned as 29.06.1966 instead of 02.05.1970. The counsel contended that the entry in the medical certificate was due to a clerical or arithmetic error. According to him, if the date of birth is taken as 02.05.1970, her age on 29.06.2006 would be about 36 years and not 40 years. On this basis, he alleged that the retirement year has been wrongly calculated as 2026 instead of 2030. In March 2024, after noticing from her salary slip that her retirement date was shown as 30.06.2026, the applicant submitted a representation dated 22.03.2024 to the Sanitation Superintendent, Civil Lines Zone, requesting correction of her date of birth and retirement year to 28.02.2030. However, the department vide reply dated 04.04.2024, informed the applicant that her date of birth recorded in her service documents was based on the medical document and was correct as per official records. Aggrieved by the rejection of her representation, the applicant filed the instant O.A. seeking directions to treat her date of birth as 05.02.1970 and to revise her retirement year from 2026 to 2030. However, during the pendency of the O.A., the respondents issued a retirement notice dated 23.03.2026 informing the applicant that as per her service book and personal records, her date of birth is 29.06.1966 and that she would retire on 30.06.2026 upon attaining the age of 60 years. The notice also asked her to submit documents for settlement of retirement benefits. Challenging the said retirement notice, the applicant filed M.A. No. 1825

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 6573

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALHarvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J), Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)Sunita – AppellantVersusMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi – RespondentM.A No. 1825/2026|O.A. No. 1414/2025

A public servant cannot claim alteration of their date of birth in service records at the fag end of their service career, especially after decades of acquiescence to the existing records, as such belated requests are barred by delay, laches, and the need for administrative certainty.

Cases Referred (1)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J), Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Sunita – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi – Respondent
M.A No. 1825/2026|O.A. No. 1414/2025