THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 14264 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner joined the service of APSRTC as a Driver, in the year 1979. His date of birth was entered in the service records, as 12.6.1951, as per the assessment made by a Medical Officer, at the time of appointment. The Depot Manager, Kothagudem, the 3rd respondent herein, issued a notification dated 18.3.2007, altering the date of birth of the petitioner as 4.3.1951. The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The date of birth of the petitioner as 4.3.1951, appears to have been entered in the service records, solely on the basis of certification of the Medical Officer, as provided for under Regulation 19(2) (b) of the APSRTC Employees Service Regulations. No dispute was raised by any one, for all these years. The order dated 18.3.2007, passed by the 3rd respondent, reads as under: “On a perusal of the personal records, it is observed that the date of birth of Sri Md. Vazeer, E.82728 is recorded in SR as 12.06.1951. In the absence of the proof of case as per Educational qualification, the date of birth is fixed as 4.3.1951 as per the age assessed by Medical Officer/RTC at the time of appointment as per Reg.19(2)(b) of APSRTC Employees (Service) Regulations 1964. Hence, it is noticed that the date of birth of Sri Md.Vazeer is now recorded as 4.3.1951 as per the age assessed by the Medical Officer, APSRTC, at the time of appointment, instead of 12.6.1951 as recorded in the SR earlier.” From this, it is evident that the 3rd respondent altered the date of birth, without any reasons, basis, or cause of action. It is not as if any inconsistency in the records, as regards the date of birth, was noticed, or that any further medical examination was conducted on the petitioner. There is no relation between one sentence of the order, and the other. It is a typical example of not only non-application of mind and whimsical exercise of power, but also arbitrariness of very high order. An important condition of service cannot be permitted to be altered, in such a whimsical manner. Hence, the writ petition is allowed, as prayed for. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 18th July 2008 PAN