IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5401 of 2005 SHIV RAM Son of Late Dhurkhelia Ram, Resident of Mohalla-Chitragupta Nagar, P.S.-Mufasil Siwan, Dist and P.O.-Siwan ---------------Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Siwan 4. The A.D.M. Siwan -------------Respondents ----------- 3. 25.08.2010 Annexure -10 is the order dated 5.3.2005 by virtue of which the claim of the petitioner for change in the date of birth from 22.4.1942 to 22.4.1952 has been rejected by the District Magistrate, Siwan on the ground that the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded in the service book, which was opened in the year 1972, as 22.4.1942. Petitioner has put his signature on the said service book and after more than 23 years of service on the basis of so called school leaving certificate, he wants a correction in the date of birth. The concerned authority has held that in terms of Rule 96 of Bihar Financial Rules, a request for correction of date of birth for any clerical error has to be made within 10 years of that entry. The petitioner has claimed discrepancy after 23 years which the rules do not permit. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was subjected to a Medical Board and the Civil Surgeon has opined about the age of the petitioner but the respondent authorities did not consider the same and decided to pass the order contained in Annexure-10. Seeking a medical opinion is not final opinion on such issue. The dispute raised by the petitioner, is a dispute for the sake of dispute to derive benefit of extra years of service after having served the respondents for 23 years. The State counsel has filed a counter affidavit and has annexed copy of the service book of the petitioner as Annexure-A. The date of birth of the petitioner has been duly recorded both in numbers and in words in Hindi and the petitioner has signed on the first page of that service book also in Hindi. It cannot be a case that the petitioner did not know the entries which were made in a language which was illegible to him. The school leaving certificate of Class-7 has no value in the eye of law. Matriculation certificate is the real proof for the date of birth and it could have been considered provided the same was produced. School leaving certificate that too 3 produced after so many years cannot be taken as the sole basis in re-fixing the date of birth. The authorities have done no wrong in assigning the reason of rejection of the claim of the petitioner. This writ has no merit and it is dismissed. Anand Kr. ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)