THE HOH’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WA No.228 OF 2004 JUDGMENT : ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed ) Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the sole respondent-writ petitioner. Perused the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court. 2. This writ appeal is ﬁled by the APSRTC represented by its Managing Director, and another against the order dated 26-6-2003 passed in WP No.18831 of 2002. 3. The facts stated are:- The respondent herein-writ petitioner, initially joined the Corporation as cleaner and eventually was promoted as Mechanical Grade-II in the year 1977 and was further promoted as Mechanical Grade-I in the year 1993. While so, the 2nd appellant herein-Depot Manager, Nuziveedu Depot, Krishna District, issued notice dated 4-7-2000 to the respondent stating that the Audit party in the Test Audit Report has pointed out that there is discrepancy in the date of birth of the respondent and the date of birth as recorded in the service record as 16-7-1949 is irregular and invalid in terms of Clause 19 of the Employees (Service) Regulation, 1964, and his date of birth was 7-9-1944. The 2nd appellant passed the impugned order and altered the date of birth of the writ petitioner as 7-9- 1944 from 16-7-1947. Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner made representation to the 2nd appellant and also appeal to the 1st appellant, but as there was no response, the writ petition was filed. 4. The learned single Judge by the impugned order allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned order mainly taking recourse to Clause (3) of Regulation 19 of the Regulations of the Corporation. A perusal of Regulation 19 of the Regulations of the Corporation, and as rightly observed by the learned single Judge, the 2nd appellant has no power to re-fix or alter the date of birth of an employee of the Corporation when once an entry is made in the service register of an employee based on the date of birth furnished by such employee at the time of joining the services of the Corporation. Under Regulation 19 of the Regulations, power to alter the date of birth of an employee of the Corporation vests with the 2nd appellant-Managing Director. In the these circumstance, we are of the considered view that the impugned order does not call for any interference by this Court. The writ appeal is meritless and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J ___________________ Sanjay Kumar, J Dated: 17-10-2011 Nrg.