IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 6138 of 2008. Decided on: November 22, 2010. Sh. Bhambi Ram …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P.& Anr. ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? Yes. For the petitioner: Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K.Bawa, AG, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer: “(A) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to consider the date of birth of the applicant as 13.1.1946 instead of 1938.” 2. In the reply at preliminary submissions, it is stated as follows: “It is submitted that the applicant Shri Bhambi Ram son of Shri Parshotam Lal, resident of village and post office, Ghanari, Tehsil, Amb, District Una H.P. had been working in this department on daily wage basis since 1988. The applicant has although completed 10 years of continuous service with this department but he is not entitled for regularization because of the fact that he has passed the age of 60 years as per voters list to which he belongs i.e. Gagret constituency. The copies of voters list for the years 1988, 1993 and 1998 are enclosed as RA-1 wherein the name of the applicant appears at Sl. No. 96/1, 61/1 and 121 and his age shown as 50 years, 60 years and 63 years respectively. With this reason, his services can not be regularized. As regards his claim to be his date of birth as 13-1-1946, and the certificates attached with his application, this seems to be 2 based on false information and affidavit given by him to the authorities concerned. The Village Panchayat and Development Officer, Village Ghanari, The Amb District Una, H.P. has issued a certificate dated 22-8-99 that Shri Bhambi Ram son of Shri Parshotam Lal was permanent resident of that village but his date of birth was not mentioned in the panchayat Register. Similarly, Pradhan Gram Panchayat, Ghanari has also certified that the name of the applicant was although available in the voters list but his date of birth is not registered in the Family List and Chowkidar Register. In view of this it is clear that the apprehension of the department is correct and action taken against him is justified. This also proves that the applicant has got the certificate issued by the authorities concerned by giving false information/affidavit and the same cannot be considered to be true. It is desirable to mention over here that the applicant voluntarily withdrew from the service and was not ousted by the department. Perhaps, in view of his over age, he did not turn up for work. Besides his claim for non-issuance of M. Roll in his name is ridiculous. The Muster Rolls are issued for work and not for the individuals.” 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of Annexure A-3, certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, the date of birth as 13-1-1946 has to be taken as conclusive. But learned Addl. Advocate General submits that the Certificate would have been issued based on false information furnished by the petitioner in the affidavit, referring to the reply as above. We are afraid that contention can not be appreciated. Once the certificate under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, is issued by the statutory authority, the same is to be acted upon as proof of age. The entry in the Register of Births and Deaths remains evidence in proof of age of the person unless the same is otherwise set aside by the competent authority. Therefore, subject to the production of the original certificate by the petitioner before the second 3 respondent, appropriate action based on the certificate thus issued by the competent authority, shall be taken by the second respondent within a period of three months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall also be entitled to the consequential benefits. 4. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. November 22, 2010. ( Justice V.K.Ahuja ), (karan) Judge.