IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 6252 of 2008 Between: A. Dayakar, S/o. Late A. Papaiah, Mishra Dhatu Nigam Ltd. Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad, R/o. H.No. 15 (1-13-33/34), Balamrai, Secunderabadf - 500 003. ..... PETITIONER AND The Managing Director, Mishra Dhatunigam ltd. Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad - 5. .....RESPONDENT 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 Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent in altering date of birth of the petitioner from 21-12-1950 to 21-12-1948 as arbitrary, illegal, unjustified and in violation of principles of natural justice and direct the respondent to rectify the date of birth in the petitioner's service record as 21-12-1950. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.GANESH RAO Counsel for the Respondent: MS.G.SUDHA The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner joined the service of the respondent-Company on 01.12.1977 as Junior Engineer. His date of birth was entered in the Identify Card as 21.12.1950. However, subsequently, the date of birth was altered to 21.12.1949 and thereafter to 21.12.1948. Inasmuch as the date of birth would have its own impact on the date of retirement of the petitioner, he seeks a declaration that the action of the respondent in altering his date of birth is illegal, unjustified and contrary to the principles of natural justice. Sri S.Ganesh Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that when his client entered the service, an Identity Card was issued clearly mentioning the date of birth of the petitioner as 21.12.1950 and there is no basis or justification for the respondents in deviating from it. Ms.Sudha, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, had produced the entire service record of the petitioner. She states that the petitioner himself mentioned his date of birth in the application as 21.12.1948 and had filed the copies of transfer certificate and H.S.C. certificate in proof of that. She contends that a wrong date of birth mentioned in the Identity Card cannot constitute the basis and in all the service records, the date of birth was entered as 21.12.1948 only. The uncertainty may exist as to the date of birth of employees who are not educated. The petitioner is an engineering graduate. His date of birth is borne out by several records, such as H.S.C. certificate, transfer certificate issued by the school etcetera. A perusal of the service record of the petitioner discloses that in all the relevant certificates, his date of birth was mentioned as 21.12.1948, both in numbers and words. In fact, the petitioner mentioned the same date of birth in his application also. A wrong date appears to have been mentioned in the Identify Card. That hardly constitutes any basis and at any rate, the petitioner, who is, in fact, aware of his date of birth, cannot take advantage of a wrong entry. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:15.04.2008 KDL ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}