LPA No.53 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.53 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.01.2010 Chander Ram ............Appellant Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- Present: Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the appellant. ALOK SINGH, J. 1. By way of present LPA, appellant/petitioner is challenging the order dated 8.10.2009 passed by learned Single Judge thereby dismissing writ petition with Rs.25,000/- cost. 2. The brief facts of the present case are that the appellant/petitioner was appointed on 15.9.1971 as Safai Sewak and his services were confirmed w.e.f. 15.9.1973. He was retired as Safai Sewak on 31.1.2005, whereas, as per his date of birth, he was to retire on 31.7.2005. It has been averted that even in the Service Book, his date of birth has been mentioned LPA No.53 of 2010 (O&M) -2- as 1.7.1945 and he should be given the salary of 6 months i.e. w.e.f. 1.2.2005 to 31.7.2005. It has been further averted that because one annual increment which has to be given to him w.e.f. 1.10.2004 has not been given to him and even the benefit of A.C.P. Scheme w.e.f. 15.9.2003 i.e. on completion of 32 years of service has not been given to him and his last pay drawn would become Rs.5160/- instead of Rs.4850/-. It has been further averted that gratuity, leave encashment, provident fund and C.P.F., Medical Allowance, DA and Bonus, which have not been released, be released to him. 3. In reply filed by respondent No.3, it has been stated that there was an ambiguity with regard to the date of birth of the appellant/petitioner and the appellant was asked to remove that ambiguity. On that, the appellant/petitioner himself filed an application alongwith an affidavit (Annexures R-1 and R-2) that his date of birth is 2.1.1945 and the same be corrected in his service record, whereby prayer of the appellant/petitioner was accepted and his date of birth was corrected, according to which he was retired on 31.1.2005. It has been further averted that appellant/petitioner was granted the benefit of 24 years of service w.e.f. 1.3.1998 and since thereafter, he had not completed 8 years of service and he retired on 31.1.2005, he was not entitled for the benefit of ACP on completion of 32 years of service. It has been further averted that last pay drawn by the appellant/petitioner was rightly fixed. 4. We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant LPA No.53 of 2010 (O&M) -3- and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner vehemently argued that date of birth of the appellant/petitioner was wrongly and illegally changed by respondent No.3 at its own and the respondents might have got the thumb impression of the appellant on the same, he is an illiterate person. Therefore, his date of birth is 1.7.1945. Learned Single Judge has rightly observed that this is unable to understand that why respondent No.3 took thumb impression of the appellant/petitioner on blank papers and then convert the same in application and affidavit. It clearly shows that contentions of the appellant/petitioner are totally false and not believable. 6. In view of the above, we do not find any justification to interfere in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge except to waive the cost imposed by learned Single Judge on the appellant/petitioner as he is a poor person and retired as Safai Sewak. 7. For the reasons recorded above, cost imposed on the appellant/petitiner is waived and the appeal being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) 25.01.2010 JUDGE ashish