1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2477 of 1998 1] Dr. Uttam s/o. Laxmanrao Kude Age 52 years, Occ. Service as Reader in the Department of Political Science, Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai, r/o. Prashant Nagar, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. 2] Prof. Mrs. Shaila w/o. Dwarkadas Lohiya Aged 56 years, Occ. Service as Lecturer in the Department of Marathi, Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai r/o. Vidyakunj Colony, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. 3] Madhukar s/o. Zumber Ingole Aged 50 years, Occ. Service as Lecturer in the Department of Sociology, Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai r/o. Vidyakunj Colony, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. 4] Gyanoba s/o. Madhavrao Momale aged 46 years, Occ. Service as Lecturer in the Department of Political Science, Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai r/o. Vidyakunj Colony, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. 5] Shripati s/o. Kishanrao Jogdand Aged 51 years, Occ. Service as Lecturer in the Department of 2 English, Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai r/o. Vidyakunj Colony, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. 6] Dr. Sahebrao s/o. Sopanrao Gathal Aged 48 years, Occ. Service as Lecturer in the Department of History, Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai r/o. Vidyakunj Colony, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. Petitioners Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary to the Govt. of Maharashtra in the Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Fort, Mumbai. 2] The Deputy Secretary the Department of Higher Education, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya Mumbai. 3] The Director of Higher Education Maharashtra State, Pune. 4] The Joint Director Higher Education, Government of Maharashtra, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad Behind Govt. Engineering College, Aurangabad, Taluka and District Aurangabad. 5] The Additional District Magistrate Osmanabad, Tq. And Dist. Osmanabad. 3 6] The Yogeshwarin Shikshan Sanstha Ambajogai, through its Chairman, Yogeshwari Nutan Vidyalaya (Boy's) Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai District Beed. 7] The Principal Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya Ambajogai, Taluka Ambajogai District Beed. 8] Harish s/o. Dattatraya Deshpande Age 61 years, Occ. Service as Lecturer in the Department of Commerce and in charge principal of Swami Ramanand Teerth Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai, taluka Ambajogai District Beed. Respondents Mr. S.S. Choudhari, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. K.G. Patil, AGP for the respondent NO.1 Mr. A.S. Golegaonkar, Advocate for the respondent No.8. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA,JJ. DATE : 29TH July, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER B.R. GAVAI, J] : 1] By way of present petition, the petitioners take exception to the certificate issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Osmanabad dated 21/6/1966, thereby certifying the date of birth of the respondent NO.8 as 11.8.1941 in place of 8/3/1936 and the Govt. Resolution dated 3/8/1996 treating the date of birth of the 4 respondent No.8 as 11.8.1941 to be valid. 2] Shri Choudhari, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the respondent No.8 was in fact born on 8/3/1936, his date of birth was illegally changed to 11th August, 1941. on the basis of certificate issued by the Additional District Magistrate on 21/6/1966. He, therefore, submits that he was rightly made to retire from the service in the year 1996 treating his date of birth to be 8/3/1936. He further submits that the Government has erred in issuing the Govt. Resolution dated 3rd August, 1996 directing the date of birth of the respondent No.8 to be teated as 11th August, 1941. 3] Shri Choudhari, further submits that the Additional District Magistrate had no jurisdiction to change the date of birth in absence of corresponding change in the SSC certificate. He, therefore, submits that the Additional District Magistrate has committed an illegality in issuing the impugned certificate. 4] Shri Golegaonkar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8 submits that the date of birth of the respondent No.8 was changed by the Additional District Magistrate, after complying with the necessary requirements and on the basis of the material placed on record. 5] Shri Patil, learned AGP appearing on behalf of the State submits that at the relevant time, the Additional District Magistrate had no jurisdiction to correct the entry regarding date of birth. 5 6] From the record it is clear that the date of birth of the respondent No.8 was changed in the year 1966. The respondent NO. 8 has entered in the service in the year 1969. It is nobody's case that the respondent No.8's date of birth has been changed after he entered in the service. The Additional District Magistrate on the basis of the material placed before him found that the date of birth of the respondent No.8 was incorrectly recorded as 8th March,1936 and hence, change it to be 11th August, 1941. on the basis of the order passed by the Government, the respondent No.8, has in fact, worked up to 2001 and retired on superannuation. In that view of the matter, we find no merit in the petition. The same is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Needless to state that the pensionary benefits payable to the respondent No.8 would be worked out, treating him in service till 30th August, 2001. Arrears, if any, be paid to the respondent No.8 within a period of six months from today. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp