1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Civil Application No. 171 of 2009 In M. C. A. St. No. 781 of 2009 In Rejected Writ Petition No. 396 of 2001 Jaideo Vithalrao Petkar Vs. Union of India & Ano. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Shri R. V. Gour Adv. for applicant. Shri S. K. Mishra Asstt. Solicitor General for respondents. CORAM: J. H. BHATIA J. Dated: 26 th February, 2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well Shri S. K. Mishra learned Assistant Solicitor General who waives notice for respondents. With consent the delay in filing this application for restoration of the writ petition is condoned. 2 2. Misc. Civil Application Stamp No. 781 of 2009 be registered which is for restoration of Writ Petition St. No. 8093 of 2001 which was rejected as per Additional Registrar's order dated 04.08.2001. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a statement that he will remove the office objections, therefore, this application is allowed and the Writ Petition is restored to file. 3. Rejected Writ Petition No. 396 of 2001 (St. No. 8093 of 2001) is hereby restored. It be registered. 4. Petitioner was appointed as Majdoor with respondent No.2 on 03.05.2006 and at the time of appointment his date of birth was recorded as 03.05.1939. According to the petitioner the age of retirement for Majdoor is 60 years. However, he made an application to the Department in 1992 and again in 1997 for correction of date of his birth, because according to him correct date of birth is 01.10.1942. However, no action was taken on his representation. In 1998 he issued notice to the respondents but no action was taken. Therefore, he filed original application No. 10 of 1999 before the Central Administrative Tribunal for correction of the date of birth. After hearing the parties and 3 perusal of record the Central Administrative Tribunal rejected the petition on the ground that he had joined the service in 1960 and that time he had told his date of birth as 03.03.1939 and accordingly it was recorded. According to the petitioner in 1980 he had obtained School Leaving Certificate indicating his date of birth as 01.10.1942. However it appears that after obtaining that certificate he had kept silence till 1992 and just before the date of his superannuation he had moved the application before the Central Administrative Tribunal for correction of the date. In view of these circumstances the Central Administrative Tribunal came to the conclusion that the petitioner had joined the service representing that he was born in 1939 and he had enjoyed the fruits of the service, therefore, at the fag end he could not be allowed to make a request for change. In the result the original application came to be dismissed. Hence this petition. 5. On perusal of the record it appears that he kept silence for almost 38 years after joining the service and only 4 or 5 months before the date of superannuation he moved this application before the Central Administrative Tribunal just to see 4 that he gets the extension of service by about 3 ½ years more. Normally the age of recruitment to the Government service cannot be less than 18 years. If the contention of the petitioner is accepted and it is held that his date of birth is 01.10.1942 then it would appear that he had not completed 18 years of age on the date of his joining service i.e. on 03.05.1939. He could not have been employed at the age of 17 ½ years in the Government service. It shows that either he had misrepresented at the time of joining his service or he had secured a false certificate later on to get extension in the age of retirement. Petitioner has not come before the Court with clean hands. I find no fault in the impugned order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. In the result the writ petition stands dismissed. ` JUDGE svk