IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No. 8012 of 2006 LAKSHMI PASWAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. B.N.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Vikas Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State: Mr. Souvendra Pandey, AC to SC-23 ***** 06. 24.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel, appearing for the State. Petitioner was appointed as Constable in Bihar Police Service at Darbhanga Police Line on 01.11.1971. Petitioner’s case is that he was appointed as a Matriculate Constable and at the time of his appointment he had produced his Mark-sheet, Admit Card and School Leaving Certificate before the Respondent authorities for verifying his qualification and date of birth. He could not produce his original Matriculation Certificate at the time of his appointment as Bihar School Examination Board did not issue the certificate till 1976. Subsequently, in the year 1979, petitioner was given his first promotion to the post of ASI, considering his qualification and two more promotions were given to him during his service career. 2 This Writ Application has been filed by the petitioner for a direction to the Respondents for making necessary correction in his date of birth, recorded in service book and also to allow him to continue in service with all consequential benefits, considering his date of birth as 16.06.1953 in stead of 16.06.1948. In case his date of birth is corrected, he will superannuate w.e.f. 01.07.2013, otherwise he will superannuate on 01.07.2008. I. A. No. 9785 of 2010 has also been filed by the petitioner for amending the relief in the main Writ Application. The additional relief is for a direction to the Respondents to reinstate him on the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in the District of Buxar, since during pendency of the Writ Application, he has retired on 01.07.2008 and for treating him as continuous service from 01.07.2008 till the date of his reinstatement. Petitioner’s case is that in the year 1976 Matriculation Certificate was issued by the Board, considering which he was given promotion to the post of ASI in the year 1979. In the year 1984, he represented his case before the 3 Superintendent of Police, Darbhanga for making correction in his date of birth as entered in his service book. Along with his representation, he had also annexed his original Matriculation Certificate, in which his date of birth was recorded as 16.06.1953, but the same was lost and no order was passed on his representation. In the year 1995, again, he applied for his duplicate copy of Matriculation Certificate and on its supply again he made a representation in the year 2004 for correction of his date of birth. That representation also remained pending and undecided, as such having no other option, he has to file this Writ Application for a direction to the Respondents for making necessary correction in his date of birth as per his Matriculation Certificate. In the Counter Affidavit, filed on behalf of Respondent No. 5, there is denial to the statement of the petitioner that at the time of his appointment, mark-sheet, School Leaving Certificate and Admit Card of the petitioner had been perused by the authorities. Counsel for the petitioner submits that 4 there is no denial that it was not produced, in case the Respondents failed to peruse these documents, despite its production, the petitioner can not be blamed for the same. It has also been stated that, admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as a Matriculate Constable because at the relevant time, Constables used to be appointed, both as Matriculate and Non- matriculate. So far Matriculate Constables were concerned, they used to be promoted to the higher post, but Non-matriculate Constables were not given any promotion, considering their qualification. Since, the petitioner was given promotion on three occasions, during his service career, as such it can not be denied by the Respondents that without looking into his Matriculation Certificate, such promotions were given to him. It has also been submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that if for promotion purposes his Matriculation Certificate is acknowledged by the Respondents than for the purposes of his superannuation, date of birth, as mentioned in his Matriculation Certificate can not be ignored by the Respondents. There could not 5 have been any refusal in making correction in his date of birth, as entered in his Service Book. In support of this contention that there can not be two ages of one employee, one for giving promotion and another for superannuation, counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a decision, reported in 2010 (4) PLJR. In that case also at the fag end of his service, the petitioner had filed his application for making correction in his date of birth, even though Rule 96 of Bihar Financial Rules, 1950 provides that for correction of date of birth, application must be filed by the employee within 10 years of his appointment. Considering the fact that promotion was given to the Writ Petitioner, acknowledging his Matriculation Certificate, it was held in this decision that the petitioner can not be said to have two dates of birth “One for purpose of his superannuation and one for purpose of his promotion. Respondents can not bifurcate the Matriculation Certificate by accepting it for the purposes of educational qualification and simultaneously rejecting the entries therein.” 6 I find that Respondents once given promotion to the petitioner, placing reliance on his Matriculation Certificate for the purposes of qualification, entry made in the Matriculation Certificate, regarding his date of birth, can not be denied. As such, the petitioner has been able to make out a case for correction in his date of birth as mentioned in the service book on the basis of date of birth entered in his Matriculation Certificate. In the Counter Affidavit, filed on behalf of the State, a serious objection has been raised so far correction in the date of birth of the petitioner is concerned on the ground that at the time of petitioner’s appointment, his date of birth was assessed by the Medical Board, to be 24 yeas. Petitioner had also put his signature on his service book, accepting his date of birth as 16.06.1948. Now, he can not be allowed to controvert it and make a prayer for its correction after remaining in service for more than 30 years. In support of his case, on this point the petitioner has placed reliance on a Division Bench decision of this Court, reported in 1995 (1) PLJR 7 691. In that case, also the writ petitioner had passed Matriculation Examination before his appointment, but the date of birth of entered in the service book was different from what has been mentioned in the Matriculation Certificate. The Writ Application was allowed and a direction was issued for making correction in the date of birth with a finding that merely because the person concerned has put his signature in the service book, containing the entry about his date of birth that can not be treated as conclusive in all cases. In such cases also, an opportunity should be given for correction of age in accordance with Matriculation Certificate. In this very decision, it has also been held that the Rule in regard to determination of age of the employees in public service on the basis of the date of birth, mentioned in the Matriculation Certificate is a Rule of Universal Application with the exception that such a benefit will not be available in case where the persons concerned has passed the Matriculation Examination later than his appointment. So far Rule 96 of the Bihar Financial Rule, 1950 is concerned, that has also 8 been considered not to be mandatory and in appropriate cases, prayer for correction of the date of birth can be entertained even after expiry of the period of 10 years from the date of appointment. Considering the facts relating to the case of the petitioner, identical to the facts of the cases of petitioners in reported decisions, counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had passed Matriculation Examination prior to entering into service, he was given promotion in service considering his Matriculation qualification and four years prior to his date of superannuation, he lastly made a prayer for correction of his date of birth as mentioned in his service book, on the basis of the date of birth entered in his Matriculation Certificate. I do not find any reason not to allow such correction in the service book of the petitioner, so far his date of birth is concerned. Accordingly, the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna, Respondent No. 2 and the Superintendent of Police at Buxar are directed to make necessary correction in the date of his birth as entered into his service book. The 9 date of birth in the service book should be corrected as 16.06.1953, i.e., as recorded in his Matriculation Certificate, in place of 16.06.1948. Since the petitioner has already superannuated during the pendency of the Writ Application on 30.07.2008, he is directed to be reinstate on the post, working immediately before his superannuation. In case, the pension fixation has been made and petitioner has been allowed all pensionary benefits that shall be refunded by the petitioner and adjusted towards arrears of salary payable to the petitioner for the period in between his superannuation and reinstatement. He shall be allowed his arrears of salary as well as all consequential benefits. The petitioner will be allowed to continue in service till the date he attains age of superannuation as per his date of corrected date of birth in his service book, based on the date of birth recorded in the Matriculation Certificate, i.e., 16.06.1953. This Writ Application is allowed. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)