THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD W.P.No.9412 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the letter, dated 20.12.2005, addressed to the 4th respondent by the 2nd respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows; The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Assistant in the Department of Information and Public Relations, Government of Andhra Pradesh in the month of April, 1984 and subsequently, he was deputed to the Central Board of Film Certification under Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (for short ‘CBFC’), Government of India in the month of October, 1986 and absorbed in CBFC in the month of February, 1988. Thereafter, he was promoted as Upper Division Clerk in CBFC in the month of May, 1989. The petitioner states that the 4th issue of his parents born on 11.03.1956 and named as V.V.N.Acharyulu, but he died within few months and that he born on 21.07.1959 as 5th issue. As the petitioner was also named as V.V.N.Acharyulu out of love and affection, his date of birth was entered as 11.03.1956 instead of 21.07.1959. He states that as he came to know about the said error in his date of birth, in 1996 from his parents and near relatives, he approached the Mandal Revenue Officer, Vemur Mandal, Guntur District, who after conducting thorough enquiry, issued a certificate of birth, dated 12.03.1996, and also issued a letter, dated 22.06.1996, certifying his correct date of birth as 21.07.1959. Thereafter, he made a representation, dated 19.09.1996, enclosing the said certificate and the letter, to the 2nd respondent seeking correction of his date of birth as 21.07.1959 instead of 11.03.1956, but the same was rejected on 31.08.2001 by the 3rd respondent on the ground that his request is time barred and as it is not a clerical error, it cannot be changed in his service register. Challenging the said rejection order, the petitioner filed O.A.(SR)No.1994 of 2003 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), which in turn dismissed the same on 29.08.2003 on the ground of delay in filing the OA. Aggrieved by the same, he filed W.P.No.22057 of 2003, which was dismissed by this Court for the same reason. The petitioner further states that since his earlier representation was rejected mechanically without going into the merits, he submitted another representation, dated 16.08.2004, seeking to correct his date of birth on the basis of the revenue records, to the 4th respondent, who also rejected the same without forwarding to the 2nd respondent. He further states that as 3rd and 4th respondents are not competent to decide the issue, he filed O.A.No.888 of 2004 before the Tribunal and the same was disposed of on 20.08.2004 directing the 2nd respondent to reconsider the claim of the petitioner on merits with reference to the documentary evidence. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent rejected the request of the petitioner on the ground that the same is barred by the time vide letter, dated 20.12.2005, which was challenged by the petitioner by filing O.A.No.127 of 2007 before the Tribunal, which in turn dismissed the same on 28.01.2008. The petitioner, again questioned the letter, dated 20.12.2005, issued by the second respondent by filing the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as there is no statutory period of limitation prescribed for claiming correction of date of birth of an employee, rejection of his claim on the ground of delay is untenable. 5. There is no dispute with regard to the appointment of the petitioner as Junior Assistant in April, 1984, his deputation, absorption in CBFC in 1986 and 1988 respectively, promotion in 1989 as Upper Division Clerk and his date of birth as 11.03.1956 in his service record. The petitioner made representation for the first time on 19.09.1996 i.e., nearly 10 years after his appointment, for correction of his date of birth as 21.07.1959 instead of 11.03.1956 in his service record. From the date of the said representation till the date of dismissal of O.A.No.127 of 2007 on 28.01.2008, the petitioner did not have any favourable order from the respondents, the Tribunal and this Court on the sole ground that his claim is time barred. The petitioner has not produced any document to show the death of 4th issue and he is the 5th issue of his parents, as rightly observed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.127 of 2007. That apart, when once the Tribunal dismissed the said O.A. filed against the letter, dated 20.12.2005, again challenging the said letter by filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is nothing but an abuse of process of law. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date:08.06.2010. sj