IN THE HIGH COUET QF CHffitTTISGftEH ^TjZiZC&TUBg Aa' SIL&SPCR M.P. KO. J_C02-/2003 HSTiTIOKER .»**' ~ l~JL\*' ^^^.-•- f""'\^ feii ^^2- Stiri S^i^._!-'al Patel, S/b Dbaram .// ''Sing'h, a.ged 57 years, Occupation •reacher Uttar Bunyadi Shala A.arang .Distt. Raipur( C.Gl, R/o Sa3-ra.ng uis-fcrict Raipur ( C.G. ) versus RliSPOriJ-Em'S ;- 1. Sta-te of Chhattisgarh Tbrough ^rCd f)rr'i" •>-'~~- £/-'(' ' ^ <-c'l"u^?- Ti\ I-SLU !T::- L.U-<V C-O^- ! Secretary Educatipn Departmen-t P.K-S. g)h''~.i-^-zh ^-^ •A^y1''^''^ ,i2^-i^-;Y"'<r~ ^/J^'^^t.* Raipur ( C.G. } '• - ~" ri*- 2^ ! 1 1, Z-av k-t- •o_^ s Board of Higher secondary Ey»ie^J f\.p_ _ ~ ~ .-—.-, *,, T.T. Bagar, Bhopal (M.p.). j pt-k^^f^^^ ^ ^ 1 - OL| .•Oi.S 'sa^.^ £,]'--y> ^ : Board of Hlgher Secondary E^^,^ . aCumu. Boarding Raipur, Ralpur (C.o.)^ ^t0 EETITION VKS^^S3^f.3S_^26/^T_C^_KE_^W^]:VV^^ OF INBI&. HIGH COURT OF JUTDICATURE CHHATTISaARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Sliri Satish K. A®iihotri,J. W. P. No. 1002 OF 2003 Petitioner Versus Respondents Shri Peel Lal Patel State of Chhattisgarh & Oth.ers Shri Atul Pandey, counsel for the petitioner. Sint. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Gkiverrunent Advocate for the State. Shri Shailendra ShuMa, counsel for the respondent No.2. ORAL ORDER (24tr July, 2006) The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on / 10.2.1972 aad posted at Kunjru Manjah, District Bilaspur, then Govenunent of Madhya Pradesh. The date of birth recorded in his service book on the basis of Higher Secondary School Certificate was 1.2.1942. After coHipleting 62 years of age of superannuation, the petitioner retired froin the service in the inonth of February, 2004. The petitioner has ffled ttus petition on 10.12.2002, seekmg refief to the efFect that date of birth of the petitioner be corrected as 8.9.1945 aad petitioner be retired accordmgly. The petitioner has filed a certificate issued by the Janpad Sabha, Raigarh, where date ofbirth is recorded as 8.9.1945 as transfer certificate. The petitioner has fdrther filed one certificate dated 7.11.2002 whereui, fhe date of birth is 1 mentioned as 8.9.1945. Froin the documents filed by fhe petitioner along with fhis petition, it appears fhat it was not produced earlier. Even ofherwise, fhe Jaapad Sabha, Raigarh, has no aufhorily to issue transfer certi&cate an.d on that basis it caanot be concluded that the date of birth recorded ia his service book i.e. 1.2.1942 was not correct. / However, even otherwise it is weU setUed principle of law fhat date of birfh cannot be corrected at the fag end of the carrier, whcn fhe eiaployee has reiaauied sitent fhrough out his carrier. In the present case, fhe petitioner was appoiated in February, 1973 and thereafter, for the first time when he was about to retire, the petitioner has ffled this petition for correction of date of birth on the basis of sonie docuinents. The petitioner was appointed as Assistaat Teacher and fhe service book, it appears, was prepared on fhe basis ofhis educational qualification, where date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 1.2.1942. In view of aforementioned, fhere is no merit in this case. Accordingty, fhe petition is disiaissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge fc^ •f^