THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD W.P.No.7951 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed assailing the order dated 25.09.2006 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, (for short ‘the Tribunal’) dismissing O.A.No.8373 of 2002 filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the action of the respondents in altering her age from 30 to 38 years without issuing any notice to her, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as a Canteen Sweeper in the hospital of the first respondent on 20.11.1980 and subsequently, her duties were converted as Cook. While the matter stood thus, the respondents issued memo dated 01.04.1984 directing the petitioner to produce her Date of Birth Certificate and accordingly, she obtained the same from the Government Hospital, Nampally, on 01.10.1988 and submitted the same to the first respondent. As per the said certificate, her age was determined as 30 years as on 01.10.1988 and the same was entered in her service records. She states that the respondents altered her date of birth from 30 to 38 years without asking her age proof and without issuing any notice to her, which is illegal and arbitrary. Though she made a representation to the respondents, no action has been taken thereon. Hence, she filed the above said O.A. before the Tribunal, which in turn dismissed the same. Aggrieved by the same, she filed the present writ petition. 3. The respondents filed counter-affidavit stating that on the basis of the age certificate, dated 01.10.1988, issued by the Civil Surgeon and Superintendent, Government Hospital, Nampally, Hyderabad, the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 01.07.1950 corresponding to 38 years of age and the same was entered in her service register. It is also stated that as per the recorded date of birth, the petitioner will have to retire on 30.06.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-II. 5. When the matter came up for hearing on 20.04.2010, this Court directed the first respondent to refer the petitioner for medical examination by a competent medical expert for determination of her age and place the report before this Court. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Services-II has produced a copy of the Age Determination Certificate of the petitioner along with a letter dated 29.04.2010. As per the said certificate, the age of the petitioner is determined as 57 years as on 29.04.2010 based on physical, dental and radiological examination. 6. Since the age of the petitioner is determined as 57 years as on 29.04.2010, which is evident from the certificate produced by the learned Government Pleader, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service till she attains the age of superannuation. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the order impugned. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _____________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date:30.04.2010. sj