@ ‘3 W3m¢k @ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR wRIT APPEAL No.5g 12010 WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2 l1l‘ OF THE HIGH COURT {APPEAL TO DIVISION BENCHI ACT 2006 READ WITH RULE' 158 (10) OF HIGI-I COURT OF CHHATTISGARH RULES 2007 APPELLANT k 3/0 sh}, w Mom JM J / Benudhar Pradhan aged about 65 rETm o N ? a ........ years, Res1dent of “Sarveshwarl 0\ ,1?) v? 0 ’q : Sadan” B—130, Raj Kishore Nagar \0\A q 3 Qe‘ § Phase—II, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT /"' . The State of Chhattisgarh Through: The Secretary General Administration Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I‘TISGARH : BILASPUR W. A. No. 58 of 2010 Appellant Benudhar Pradhan Versus Respondent The State of Chhattisgarh WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTON 2(1) OFTHE CHHA’IVI‘ISGARH HIGH COURT (APPEAL TO DIVISION BENCH) ACT, 2006 DB: Hon’ble Mr‘ I. M. Quddusi, 8r. Hon’ble Mr. Prasgant Knmar Mishxa, JJ. Appellant m person. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. Advocate for the respondent] State. o R D E R (oran ( Passed on this 12th day ofApril, 2O 10 ) Per I.M.Quddusi, J. ' I 1. Heard the writ appellant as well as learned counsel appearinfor g the respondent] State. 2. This wn't appeal has been med against the impugned judgment and order dated 18m January, 2010Mpassed by the learned Single Judge in WP. No. 536/ 2004 ( Benudhar Pradhan Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh), dismissing the writ petition, which was filed challenging the date of birth of the writ appellant. According to the writ appellant, his date of birth, in fact, was ‘24.1.1945’ but was wrongly recorded in the service book as ‘10. 2. 1944’. 3. The writ appellant has annexed the hrst page of his service book as 'Annexure P/ 1 tothe writ petition. We have perused the same and found that the date of birth of the writ appellant has been mentioned as ‘10—2- 1944’. In words Tenth February Ninteen Huindred. Forty Four’ has been written. This service book was prepared on 28.11.1969 and was signed by the Sub Divisional r appellant was posted on the post of Naib Tahsildar. According to the writ appellant, for the &st time in November, 2003 his mother informed him that his date of birth should be somewhere in 1945 and that too in the month of Janualy. This was old by his mother when the writ appellant informed her that he is going to retire on 29.2.2004. On that basis the writ appellant started moving representations for correction in the date of birth. It is well settled law that once date of birth is recorded in the service book, the same cannot be changed unless there are very cogent maSOHS . On hearing the writ appellant that he got information when he was going to be retired on 29.2.2004 and all of a sudden he‘started moving representations to get his date of birth changed, it shows that the writ appellant never raised any objection during his entire service, till December, 2003. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and perusing the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find no illegality or impropriety in the same. Therefore, the writ appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself. z ‘ his; ,7 t. I .Sd/- ‘ Sdl- i -M-Quddusi Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge Judge Thakur t r