IN THE HIGH OOORT OF ©HHM'TISSMtHuTOBIG&TlWEsBI^epUR .P . No . )t62-/2 003 . pBTi'ra®NE» / PONDENT s^e^ «'^sy"" s lohit' Slngh, aged 58 yeairs S/®Madhawa Slngh. Ptiap Ggefator Jonk Nahar, sab ©ivlsionN©.2 imefafej.oi'i Bepartment, Pauiai, Tahsil Bilaigarta., Oistfe., Raipar (0.®.). VE R S(J S ) State efi.QIahattisgarh . Through : The SeeFefeary, Irrigatiea Bepartment» B.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.e.) )Su]» Biva.sional ©SiEieer, «3'®nMNafaaE, Suis Biviai©nNo.2 Pauni, Tah. Bi.la.igarh, Bist't, Raipur (Q.<3.). Bxeeu.t.lve EngiBeer, Jonia Nahar, Wafeer Resetirees Bl.vislonal Offioe, KaAdel /_ ., ,•/ ,_:'_ .: Tafa. Kasdol, Bis<st,./Bai;puF (e,©.) yWRIT PETITIQN UNiDER ARTIC&E OS' e@iSST3:'RJT|OW. ®E K^/] ^' : INBIA -B>eR ,ISS(«(NQE"0»'''WRa:a>-iIN:.t'6>j8l':<at'.MSHa^®S;''©S.-ANY: OTOER',S<^.ABBR©PR&^;::T@'THB:/B^eT8^^^ . -OF THE ®ASBORI.B:ERECTI®N;.:<3R'-ftNy:eTHBR,-eRiJSl;:.2.: ^; ::• u H ^ f4 HIGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH ATBILA8PUR (C.Cr.t WRIT PBnTIOH HO. 1162 OF 2003 RoUtSlngh Vs. State ofclihatttepirh and others. <?1 ORDBR < t'. Postfor 2-r-07-200S Sd/- Sunil KumarSinha - Judge ' \- 1»' HIGH COURT OFCaiHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.l WMTPBTITION no. 1162 OF 3003 RohitSin^t v». State of CUiattIsgarh aad othens. Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate wifh Sushri Shipra Biswas, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Pankaj Sbrivastava, Panel Lamiyer for the State/respondents. O R D ER (2-^07-2005) SUML KUMARSINHA. J. '»,.,. *1,~ (1) This pctition has been filed under Article 226/227 offhe Constitution of India for correcting fhc date of birfh of fhe petitioner in his semce book as 27.11.1948 in place of 23.11.1942 and for directing hu reuistatemcnt to the post of Pump Operator fium which he has been retired on 30.11.2002 on fhe basis of attainiag the age of superannuation of 60 years calculatmg fiom 23.11.1942. (2) The case of the petitioncr is that whilc hc was workmg on thc post of Puinp Operator, he camc to lcaow in thc inonth of December, 2000 fhat he is going to retire veiy soon aad he would bc retired by the monfh of November, 2002. On his enquny, he came to know that hls date ofbirfh recorded ia tfae semce book is 23.11.1942 instead of 27.11.1948 and therefore, fheSaJd tetiTeincnt is to be efFccted. Aflter gettu^ this information, he inuaediatety wrote a letter to fhe respoudents but he did not get any repfy fix>m them. 'niereafter, fhc petitioner served a noti.ee on 23.3.2001, (Annxure-P/2) by Registered Post to the respondcnts and sought for correction. l<jr.. 't^- <- Bvcn afber that no correctfon waa inadc and ultiinatety he retired on 30.11.2002. (3) In thc writ pctition, fhe petitkiner has annfixed a copy of birth ceTtificate (Annexure-P/4) issued by thc Director Economic aud Statistic Dcpartment, Madhya Pradesh issued on 30.11.2001 after rcgistratton on 28.11.2001. He has also anacxed a eopy of relevaat page of adnussion register of fhe School and copy oftransfer ccrtificate issucd fix>in Qoverament School, Kawanih, District- Rajnaadgaon (Aniiexurc-P/5) aud a copy of certificate fesued finm Muiucipal School showiag that the petitioaer is leawing the School after passing class 6fh. In aU these dociunents fhe date of birth of fhc petitioner is mentioned as 27.11.1948. (4) Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits fhat earlicr to this petition, the petitioncr had filed an onymai appUcatfon before fhe State Admiaistrative Tnbunal, Jabalpur, Bech at Raipur vide O.A. No. 1410/2001 for ahnost the similar reUefs but fherc was no presiding officer or fhc m.cm.ber ia fhe said bench of the Tribunal aad fhe inatters were tmnecessarily Un^ered on, therefore, the petitioner was constraiaed to Ste tbis writ petition before fhis Court. He also subinits that ultimately, the Tribunal has been aboUshed aad fhe matters are being transferred to fhe High Court and fhc said original applicatton shaU be withdrawn at the appropriate stage. (5) The retum has been filed on behalf of the State/respondents. (6) It has been submitted by fhe State that thc petitioner made an appUcation for correcting his date of bntti at fhe fag end of his serviccs whcn he becamc duc for retirement. It M also submitted fhat fhe date ofbirth incntioned ia fhe service book of fhe pctitioner is 23.11.1942 whlch is on fhe basis of declaratton of the petitioner tmnself at the time of entiy in. scrvice. Not onty fhis, a dcclaration form. in. relation to the Cf. personal description, which was required to be filed in pursuauce of the cireular of the State Govermnent bearing No. 351 C.R. 23-41 1/3/7 dated 05.07.1971, was also fiUed byfhe pctitioner which bears his awm. s^nature, in which also fhe petitioiier has mentfoned tus date ofbirfh as 23.11.1942. This document bears the Photographof fhe petitioner aad has been filed as Annexure-R/1. A copy of relevaat page ofscrvicc book has also been fited as Annexurc-R/,2 in wliicll tfae date ofbirfh ineutuned is 23.11.1942 wlu.ch bears fingcr prints of fhe petitioner acconUng to fhe rules atong wifh lus five specimen signatures ia fhe relevant column. (7) The rejoinder to fhte retum has becn filed by fhe petitioner on 17.09.2004 in whfchfhe petitioncr has stated fhat in fect, his .sigaatures were obtajned iu the blank declaration form and aU fhe details laentioncd thcrein have been fiUed up by fhe deparbnent aad not by the petitkiner. It is also stated that the petitioner was ndt suppUed thecopy of fhe service boolr, thcrefore, he waa w>t aware about fhe date ofhis birth. recorded iu it and fhe mistake contmued until the petitioner cam.e to kaow about it. (8) Leamed counsel for the petidoner submits fhat after knowiag about the wrong entiy in the scrvice record, fhe petittoner has subinitted an appUcation. before the Sub- Divisional OfEicer on 10.12.2001 vidc AnncXure-P/9 alon^wlth atl his certfficates icferred to above. He refeis to the dociuneat Aimcxurci-P/10 which is a mcmo dated 21.11.2002 written by fhe Supenntending Engmeer (Admn.) to fhe Sccretaiy, Water Resources Dcpartment in which it has been stated fhat fhe date of birth of fhe pctitioner ia fhe service record has been inentioned as 23.11.1942 where as accordiDg to ftic ccrtaficates produced before the department, his date ofbirth appears tobe 27.11.1948. These dociuaents were exanuned by fhe ofBce of Superintending Enguieer and were found to bc correct After writing fhis, the SuperintBndiag Engineer had requested for taking an carly dccmion in the cascoftiic pctitioner rcfeiring ..-<"' ir II1 4 ^ that takaig fhe date of birfh as 23.11.1942, fhc petitioner has to retire on 30.11.2002. (9) Leamed counsel for fhc petitioner furtlicr submits that aflber perusal of fhis ineino dated 21.11.2002, it would appear that the concemed Superintendit^ Bngineer was fiiUy satisficd wifh the dociunents filed by fhe petitioner before him that the date of birth of the petitk>ner is27.il. 1948 and fhere was delaj? on fhe part of fhe Exeoutive Engiaeer by not sendiag the matter to fUe Govemiaent for consideration ia tiine. (10) I have heard leam.ed couasel fbr the petitioaer ^ well as counsel for the State at lengfh. and have also pcrused the records produced by fhe respective parties. y (11) It has bcen held by fhe Apex Coiut in fhe matter of UHIOH OF INDIA -V- HARNAM SINOH. (19931 2 8CC 162 that It is open to a civil servaat to claim correction of his date ofbirth, jfheisiu possession ofirrefutable proofrelatmg to his date ofbirfh as dififerent fiom. the one earlier recorded aad cven if fhere is no period of liimtation prescribed for seekmg correction ofdate ofblrth, fhe Govermnent servaat niust do so wifhout aay tmreasonable delay. In fhc absence bf aay piovision ia fhe rules for correction ofdate ofbirfh, the gencral principle of refuslng relief on grouads of lachcs or state claims, is geiieraUy appUed by fhe courts aud tribunals. It is nonefheless competent for fhe Goveminent to fix a time-lumt, ia thc scrvice rules, after which no appUcation •for correctfon of date of birfh of a Govemment scrvaut caa be entertained. A Govermnent servant who makes an appUcadon for cqrrectionof date ofbirthbeyond the tiiae, so fixed, therefore, caanotclaun, asa inatter ofr^ht, fhe eorrection ofhisdate ofbirftt evcn ifhe has good evjdence to cstabfeh fhat fhe recorded date ofbirth is ckarly crroneous. Thc law of liautation may operate harshfy but it has to be appUed with att its r^our and the courts .or tribunals cannot coiae to fhe aid offhosp who sleep over their rights and allow the period of lunitation to expire. Unlcss w ^ 'fc. »< ^- !< altered, his date ofbirfh ^ recorded would determine his date of superaxinuation evea ifit amouats to abridging his r^ht to Gontinue in servicc on fhe basis of lus actual ays. A public servant inay dispute the date ofbirtli as entered iu thc service record and apply for ite corrcction but till fhe record is corrected he caanot claim to continue ia scrvice on the basis of the date ofbirth clauncd by him'. (12) It has further been held by fhe Apex Court in fhe naatter of STATE OP PUNJAB ABD OTHBR8 -V- S.C. CHADHA, reported in (20041 3 8CX! 394 that 'an appUcation for correction of fhe date of birtli should not be dealt wifh by fhe courts, tnbuxial or the H%h Court keepit^ ia view onty the pubUc servaiit concemed. Unless a clear case on the basis of nliTir'hing materials, which can be Iield to be concluswe ia tiature, is nxade out by the employce and. fhat toa wifhin a reasonable tiine as provided in. fhe rules govcming fheservice, fhe court or the tdbunal should not issue a direction or inake a declaration on fhe baste of inaterials which inake such claua oiity plausibk. Before any such direction is issued or declaration Baade, the coiut or the tribunal naust be fully satisfied that there has been real injustice to fhe pcrson concemed aad his claim for correction ofdate ofbufh has been niade ia accordaace wifh fh.e procedure prescribed, aad wlfhia thc tiaae fixed by aay rule or order. If no rulc or ordcr has been fi-amed or made, prescribmg the period wifhia which such appUcation has to be fikd, then such appUcation must be filed wifhia at least a reasoiiable tune. The appUcaat has to produce fhe cvMence ia supportof such claim, whicli may amouat to irrefutable proof relating to lus date of birfh. Wllcnever any such question arises, fhe onus is on the appUcMit, to prove about fhe wrong reeording of tris date of birth, in tus semce- book. (13) The vcry purpose of recordiag fhe date of birth of a goverament servant in. his semce-book is to fix a partfcular date of tiis retirenient lUider fhe coitditions of sri-vice or the Y'* •^T rules regulatu^; condition of service. A govcrument servant cannot be retiicd nor his service cau be dispensed with tn usual conditions unless he aftains the ^e of-superannuation pn the basis ofthc entiy ofdate ofbirfh in hte semce records. If a wroi^; entiy is inade in fhc service record of a govertunent scrvant, fhen it could not be said fhat fhe same cannot be corrccted at aU. The govcmincnt seryant has a r^ht to inake a requcst for its correctfon when such ari ex^ency ariscs ia his service. TIus right ofcorrection of date ofbirfh may be availed under fhe statutoiy rutes and if fhe rules are tfaere, fhc procedure ]aid down uadcr fhc rules iacluding fhe period of lunitation eto., must be foUowed. During the coursc of fhe ai^uments, this Court specificalty asked tlie Panel Lawycr appearing for fhe State as to whefhcr any such rules for correction of date of birfh in fhe service record are prevailiag in fhe State of Clihattisgarh. Panel Lawyer inade fhte stetement that no such rules are prevailing hcre. Therefore, when the rules in fhis regard havc not beea fiained, the matter has to be dealt wifh iu a general inann.er and no time lunit could be fixed for inakii^ an exercise by the govenunent servaat for correction oflus date ofbirth. Ho^ever, on the bas»ofratio of the judgments rendercd by the Apex Court in abovc two matters, it would appear that tfae appBcation for correetion of date of birfh inust be made willun a reasonable period. What should be fhe reasonable penod is to bc detenniaed on the facts and circumstences of a particular case. There may be the cases in which fhe fact about tbe wrong entiy ofdate ofbirfh inay not bc in the kiiowledge of the employce upto a veiy long period, but it may come in. his knowlcdgeat fh.e fag endofhis service and in sonie cases, fhough knowledge to the govenuaent servaat may be fhere but lie saay not have taken steps for its correction. for a yeiy loi^ period. Therefore, fhe aigmneats advanced by fhc learaed counsel for fhe State fhat fhe petitioncr niade a request for correctkin of his date ofbirth at the fag ead ofhis service aad on this ground onlyj his cl£iim was r^hfly not cntertained by thc State could not bc] accepted. -t-~ V; First of all, we shall determine as to when the pctitioner caine to kuow about wrong entiy inade ia his service records. If we examinc thc records of fhe case, it would-appear fhat the petitioner 'bas made fhis pleading that he was not having any knowledge about declaration fonn filled ia his case. Hc submitted that though fhc declaration form bears his signatures but tUe sqpiatures have been obtamed in blaak foTSt (Aiuiexure-R/1) and fhe entrieswere niade on soine later dates. It is also subinitted that fhe entries are not in fhe hand writing of fh.e petitioner. It is also stated that the copy of service-book had never been supplied to the petitioner, therefore, the petitiDner couM. not coinc to know about fhc wrong date of birfh inentioncd in bofh fhese documents i.e. Annexures-R/1 & R/2. WIien he could coiae to knovT about fhese entries iu tiie year 2000, then only, he made aa applicatioa for correction of date of birfh to his concemed aufhority along wifh aU his d«:iunentswtuch were ultimatety forwarded by the Supenntendii^ Enginecrvide his niem.0 dated 21-11-2002 Aunexure-P/10. AU fhesc facts aad dociunents go to show that the kaowledge about fhe entiy of wiong date of birfh was gafhered by fhe petitioner in December2000 onty. (14) Aniiexure-P/10 is rcproduGed as ttuder: "WI^-3316108/W^O/2(»1 cRi<4li?t<i 'g^a' srpRRn' ^i?r W H f^ipT wiy. »TCf1<f'lfi, WIg^ f^TW 21/11/2002 HRr, ^ra, ^^WI??IRI?T ^Id 'WITER f^lFT ^n?ra;^piy. fttw- -<ft YiftcT Ris 44iiM<* ^ ^RT gRim 4 ^raf^Pr ^el^ I?? •ii*)ro'i ^d^ ^ra?[ 1 8 w^- ^ X^OiW tlqi 1'igfro Itl^I ^ ^at §i? dctfrtd 1spife^F I ~WS!Q *<gM<fl ifRra^t cpsFR •?ray c^ T?r ^ricp M6/W/WT. (<HT)/frA%/2001 f^TW 21/11/02 l Rwid4d, wffi?r q? yriq? 636/7T./'wr.(ffl)/TrAq;. /2001 f^Tfcl? 21/11/2002 ^ ^piT IlRfWRTt ^ TlRf '?lf§^ WP'T ? 1 <ft ^tfer ^s w 'ETT?W (TOWT.) q?t ^RT yRd'fei ^ SI^IR WW <IR Slfea uCTf^ 23/11/1942 t l ^W OTW ^ '^ ?irar WWM'("I !CTIBT xi?f ^ SI^IR ?^t ul'HRt^T 27/11/1948 sif^cf t i fNf ^T ^wifera 5TCT ''jyT imTOT11?T tCT314<?)1*rl f^IT irar t T?? •2i? ^t TTSTT irar t ^ff ^ri^uli^RUT 4 W^RT tbt'iiMiei'i ^ grcr wra ^gcT qifecr ^i4^ ?i€f^t '^ ^IT y^a ?terrt i 3RT: 3CT WPI ^ ^fe 4 '^ i<? ^IraTH^Ur TR aftcra *l4<ll^l ^ aig^ET t, qafi^ cb^ifi^ q5t ^ir ^Rd*i ir sif^r ui'*f[a^T ^ SIRR tR f^TO) 30/11/2002 ^T ^IR^TCf q?? f^ff un^rr i ^I5(l^- yH'dqai^oif 1 ^tem TfSf (!Riro) ^Nera gq?? site-gr ^Rt '•fffflER f^iFT, Wg? »<^l't1<l^' The words written in fhis documcnt by the Supermtendmg Engineer as''ui'<lta|Sr 27/11/1948 3Jfe?r t | l^T ^T q?rafera ?RT Tjcr OTPT IRT ^r araeticR fezir ^rar t T^ q? ^twiT ^PiT ?" goes to show fhat thc entiy m relation to the date of birfh in fhe certificates Were fouad to be correct at least to thc satisfaction of the SuperintendiagEn^inecr and then onty fhe matter was forwarded to fhe concemcd Secretaiy of tiie Goveminent. •a agEBfr - •^^ r< (15) Ifwe examine the document Annexure-P/5, wluch is fhe traasfcr certificate of Govenunent Higher Secondaiy School, Kawardha, Distnct Rajnandgaon which-appears to be issued on 27-2-1998, then it would be ctear fhat fhe petitioner was admitted in class-6tfa ia fhe sakl institution on 2-7-1962 aad studied there up to 15-12-1963 and thereafiber he teft Iiis iastitution on 16-12-1963. His date ofbirth in this certi&cate has been nientioned as 27-11-1948. Likewise, fhe doctunent Aimexure-P/6 is transfer ccrti&cate issued by the Hcadinaster of fhe School afier passiag cl^s-5ti>. This cerdficate WE^ issued on 30-4-1962 in which it has bcen shown that fhe petitfoner studied in Primaiy School, Kawardha fi?om 1-7-1958 to 30-4-1962. In fhis ccrtifiGate ateo fhe date ofbirfh ofthe petitioncr is shown as 27- 11-1948. Copy of admMsion xegister of fhe Govt. H^her Seeondaiy School bas also been filed in which fhe name of the petitioner is shown at S. No. 2341. In fhis reguster ateo the date of birfh of fhe petitioner lias becn shown as 27-11-1948. The petitioner has been shown to be admitted in class-6til. Copy of admlssion register, traasfer ccrtificate Aaenxure-P/5 and also transfer certificate Aimexure-P/6 dated 30-4-1962 apparenftyeo-relate witti each other aad fh.cy aU go to show ibat so far as tfae educational records are conceraed, thc date of birth of the pctitioner in fhose records has bccn mentioned as 27-11-1948. These are fhe statutoiy docuinente and pruna facie there appears to be no dispute about that (16) Iffhe pctitioner had fited all thesc docuiaents along wifh fhe appUcation before fhe local aufhori.ly and the local authpri.ly has also takcn a view that fhe docuinents were secn aad found to be corrcctyide Aanescure-P/lO dated 21-11-2002 and fhe matterwas forwarded to fhe State Govt., tiien fhc State Govfc w^ tmder obl^ation to decide tfae case ofthe petitioner by passu^; an order on his appU.catiDn which was dufy forwarded to it under memo dated 21-11-2002. 10 (17) The petitioner is said to be class-6dl passed. The documcnts filed by Wvn, particularly, fhe certificates iarelatioii to tus educational m.sti.tutions are oM docuiuents aad fhey may amoT.mt to urefutable proof and clm.ching evidcnce relatuig to his date of birfh. But all fhe efforts made by the petitioner remamed unattended, whea fhe State dM notdecide his claim. forwarded by the Superintendiag Engiaeer vide Annexure-P/10 on 21-11-2002 and his retireincut was eflFected by keeping the claiia in abcyaiice. (18) The Govt servant inay or naay not be entifled for the reliefl[s) claimed by Tiim, but hc is always entitled for a reasonable consideration of hfe claun made for fulfilliaent ofhis reUef(s). If aay statutoiy provisions are made by Legislature or fhe directions arc issued by fhe State for consideration of a particular claim., then fhey are to be applicd by fhe authorities offhe State, wlule deaUng with fhe inatter, butwhere no such legislation has been brought and no such ducctions or poUcy has been issued by fhe State, fhen right of consideratipn shaU be goveracd by the generalprmciples. (19) I have already cleared that fhc State has riot fi-amed aay rules and no directiDns/cuculars/PoUcy regardiag decision on fhe dispute of date ofbirth has been brought to the notice of Uus Court, thcrefore, in the facts aad ciroiuastaaces of this particular case wlicEe fhe educational records of the petitioner show fhat hte date ofbirfh recorded fherem is 27-11-1948 aud knowledge about wrong entiy appears tp be received by 1lie petitioner ia fhe inonth. of Deceinber 2000^ I deein it proper fhat the State Goveramcnt inust takc a decisjon on the claiias niade by the petitioaer and forwarded by the Supenntending Engineer to it. (20) It is hereby directed that the concemcd Secretary of fh.e State Ctovenunent sIiaU take a decision on fhe ease of tlie petitiouer forwarded to it by fhe SupeBntendiag Elngmeer on 21-11-2002 (Aanexure-P/10) by consideriitg fhc docum.entaiy 11 < •'''/ evidcnce produced by fhe petituner in form of his school leaviag eertificates and copy ofadmission register offhe schooL The Secretaiy stiall be SXK to inake au eaquiiy ia relation to fhe correctaess of the contents offhese documents. A reasoned order shaB be passed by the Secretaiy in l^ht of fhe observatk»nsmade by fhis Courfc Howcver, siace the petitioner has already been retired on 30-11-2002, fhis entire exercise shall be coaipleted wifhia a period of3 inoufhs fiom. today. (21) In fhc result, fhc writ pctition is atlowcd to thc extent iadicated above. There shaU be no ordcr as to fhe costs. Sd/- SuniIKumarSinha - - 'Judge Vatti ' \.