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

2020 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 955

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NEELAM – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS – Respondent


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 09.04.2026 Neelam ..... Petitioner VERSUS The Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ujval Mittal, Advocate, for the respondents.

*****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J.(Oral)

1 In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 10.10.2019 (Annexure P-7) and 26.08.2020 (Annexure P-9), whereby, request made by the petitioner for change of her date of birth from 08.05.1961 to 10.10.1969, has been rejected.

2. The brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner was appointed on regular basis as Safai Karamchari vide order dated 25.01.2017 on compassionate ground after the death of her husband, namely, late Sh. Joginder who expired on 18.02.2008. The petitioner was confirmed on the abovesaid post vide letter dated 05.06.2020 (Annexure P-3). As per the petitionier, it came to her notice that her date of birth was incorrectly mentioned as 08.05.1961 in the service record, whereas, her correct date of birth is 10.10.1969. The petitioner had placed reliance upon the S

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top