A government employee cannot seek correction of their date of birth in service records at a belated stage or at the end of their career if the request is made beyond the stipulated timeframe prescribed by the relevant service rules.

****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J. (Oral)

1. The issue involved in the present writ petitions is similar, as such, both the writ petitions are taken up together for disposal and the facts are taken from CWP No.11991-2016.

2. In the present writ petition(s), the petitioner(s) has challenged the order dated 16.05.2016 (Annexure P-4) whereby, a memo has been issued to the petitioner that he will retire on 30.06.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation i.e. sixty years

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Beldar on 01.03.1984 under the UT Administration, Chandigarh. Thereafter the services of the petitioner were transferred to Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh. Taking into consideration the date of birth mentioned in the service book of the petitioner, the petitioner was served with a memo dated 16.05.2016 (Annexure P-4) whereby, the petitioner was to retire upon attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years on 30.06.2016.

3. Aggrieved against the abovesaid memo dated 16.05.2016 (Annexure P-4), the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that, in light of Annexure P-2, the petitioner was not liable to retire on 30.06.2016. As per the petitioner, the date of birth is 08.06.1956, as such, the date of birth of the petitioner mentioned in the memo dated 16.05.2016 (Annexure P-4) is incorrect. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Annexure P-2 dated 18.06.1977, i.e. record of the school, wherein, the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 12.07.1967. He submits that, in light of the abovesaid school record, the petitioner is entitled to retire on 31.07.2027. Reliance is placed on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “ Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and others Vs. Chhota Birsa Uranw ”, 2014(12) SCC 570.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner has approached this Court after a lapse of 32 years. Reliance is placed on the Fundamental Rules , which as per learned counsel are applicable in the case of the petitioner as well. As per the rules, an alteration in the date of birth of a Government servant can be made only within 5 years of his appointment into Government service. As there was no request made by the petitioner for alteration in the date of birth within the above mentioned stipulated period, as such, taking into consideration the date of birth of petitioner, the petitioner has rightly been retired from service on attaining the age of 60 years on 30.06.2016. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that during the pendency of the present writ petition bearing No.CWP-11991-2016, petitioner-Murgeson has expired and the petitioner is being represented though LRs.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.

7. A perusal of the facts of the present case would show that there is no dispute that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Beldar in the year 1984 in the UT Administration, Chandigarh. Thereafter the service of the petitioner was transferred to Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh on 20.05.1996. The relevant notification showing the transfer of the petitioner dated 20.05.1996 is attached as (Annexure P-1) with the present writ petition. As per the notification, the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 08.06.1956.

8. The petitioner has filed the present wr