IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 20696 of 2008 Between: Md.Khaliq S/o.Md.Khaleel APSRTc,Mahabubnagar Depot, R/o.3-5-6/1, Kummaravadi Madina Masjid Road,Mahabubnagar District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC,Mahabubnagar Region Mahabubnagar District 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC,Mahabubnagar Depot Mahabubnagar District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not treating petitioner date of birth as per petitioner driving license as 29.6.1954 instead of 29.5.1950 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to correct petitioner date of birth as 29.6.1954 and release all additional monitory benefits and all other retirement benefits which is entitled by petitioner by considering petitioner representation dated 20.8.2008 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENKATESSHWARLU Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.20696 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner herein is working as a driver in the A.P. State Road Transport Corporation. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in not treating the petitioner’s date of birth as 29.06.1954 in stead of 29.5.1950 as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to correct the petitioner’s date of birth as 29.06.1954 and release additional monitory benefits and retirement benefits as per his representation dated 20.08.2008. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed in the post of driver in the year 1984. He fell sick in the year 2007 and after medical examination by the APSRTC Hospital, Tharnaka, Hyderabad, he was declared unfit for service in class A-1 category. Accordingly, he was retired form service on 24.03.2008 on medical grounds. Though the petitioner was paid gratuity, he was denied the additional monetary benefits as per Regulation 6-A(5)(b) of the APSRTC Employees’ (Service) Regulations 1964 on the ground that the service left over was not sufficient. The petitioner claims that thereafter he came to know that his date of birth was wrongly recorded in his Service Record as 29.05.1950. The petitioner contends that his correct date of birth is 29.06.1954 as mentioned in his driving licence and the same was also entered in all his service records. It is further contended that the date of birth was altered by the respondents as 29.05.1950 without notice to him and on the basis of the same he was denied the additional monetary benefits. Though the petitioner requested the 2nd respondent to release the additional monetary benefits taking into consideration his correct date of birth i.e. 29.06.1954, the same was rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Corporation, it is stated that the petitioner was appointed on 24.11.1984 as temporary driver on contract basis and he retired from service with effect from 24.03.2008 on medical grounds. It is further stated that the date of birth was entered in his service register as 29.06.1950 as per Medical Certificate No.05793 dated 29.05.1984 and the same date was mentioned even in the other records and nomination forms. At no point of time the petitioner sought alteration of his date of birth. Therefore, he cannot seek such alteration after his retirement on medical grounds. Heard both sides. The record placed before this Court by the learned standing counsel for the Corporation substantiated the version of the respondents in the counter affidavit that the petitioner’s date of birth was entered in his service record as 29.06.1950 as per the Medical Certificate No.05793 dated 29.05.1984 issued by the Civil Assistant Surgeon, APSRTC Hospital, Tharnaka, Hyderabad in which he certified that the petitioner was aged 34 years. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner had applied for retirement on medical grounds and accordingly, he was retired from service with effect from 24.03.2008. The dispute with regard to his date of birth was admittedly raised long thereafter. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has no educational qualifications and does not possess any authenticated document with regard to his correct date of birth. However, he relies upon the driving licence, in which his date of birth was mentioned as 29.06.1954. It is contended that he was given appointment as a driver on the basis of the said certificate and even in the service records the same date of birth was mentioned. However, the Service Record produced before this Court by the learned counsel for the Corporation shows that the petitioner’s claim is incorrect and that the Doctor who examined him at the time of his appointment had issued a certificate dated 29.05.1984 stating that he was aged 34 years and accordingly, his date of birth was recorded in the Service Record as 29.06.1950. The relevant provisions under the APSRTC Employees’ (Service) Regulations, 1964 relating to recording of the date of birth of the employees in the service record are as under: Regulation 19(1) Every person on entering the service of the Corporation shall declare his date of birth which shall not differ from any declaration, express or implied, made by him for any public purpose before entering such service, for this purpose, the date of birth as recorded in a school or college certificate shall be adopted without any modification. Regulation 19(2) (b): Where the person concerned is unable to furnish satisfactory evidence of his age, it should be assessed by a Medical Officer of the corporation and the age so assessed or the age as declared by the person, whichever is made, shall be accepted as final and the employee shall be assumed to have completed that age on the date of attestation by the Medical Officer. Regulation 19(3): The date of birth as determined by the appropriate provisions of the preceding clauses shall be recorded in the service. The date so recorded shall be held to be binding and no alteration of such date shall be permitted subsequently. In the instant case, since the petitioner was unable to furnish satisfactory evidence of his age, the Corporation had rightly got it assessed by the Medical Officer and as per the certificate issued by him, the petitioner’s date of birth was recorded as 29.06.1950 at the time of his appointment. As per Section 19(3) of the Regulations, the date so recorded is binding. It is also relevant to note that the petitioner in this case never sought correction of the entry when he was in service. Such a request made after his retirement cannot be entertained on any ground whatsoever particularly in the absence of any substantial/authenticated evidence to support his claim that he was born on 29.06.1954. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 06-08-2009 KLP