IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 246 of 2008. Reserved on: 22.10.2009. Decided on: 11.11.2009. _____________________________________________________ Shri Babu Ram. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, ACJ. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. P.K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents. The petitioner was appointed as driver with effect from 18th May, 1978. He has given his date of birth on the basis of school leaving certificate as 1.3.1951. He was retired from service vide Annexure A-6 with effect from 31.8.2006 after treating the original date of birth as recorded in the Military service records, i.e. 27.8.1948. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - Mr. R.P. Singh has vehemently argued that Annexure A-6, dated 29th December, 2007 is illegal and arbitrary. He further contended that the date of birth of his client as per School Leaving Certificate is 1.3.1951 and the same could not be altered to 27.8.1948. Mr. R.K. Bawa, learned Advocate General has vehemently argued that in Military records, the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 27.8.1948 and this fact was not disclosed by the petitioner at the time of seeking civil employment. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings carefully. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioner had served the Indian Army from 27.8.1968 to 28.3.1974. The petitioner sought civil employment on 18.5.1978 when he was appointed as driver/operator with the respondent-department. He had produced School Leaving Certificate, in which his date of birth was shown as 1.3.1951. The department while dealing with the disciplinary case against the petitioner came to know that the petitioner had earlier served in the Indian Army from 27.8.1968 to 28.3.1974 and as per Last Pay Drawn Certificate issued by the Army Record Officer his date of birth is recorded as 27.8.1948. The department consequently treated 27.8.1948 as the original date of birth and retired the petitioner on 29th December, 2007 with effect from 31.8.2006. The petitioner ought to have disclosed at the time of entering into civil employment that he had earlier served in the - 3 - Indian Army. He had concealed this information from the department. His date of birth, as noticed above, in the Army record is 27.8.1948. However, the petitioner has relied upon Annexure A- 4, i.e. School Leaving Certificate whereby his date of birth is recorded as 1.3.1951. The petitioner has not explained how this discrepancy has crept in the service record with regard to date of birth. The petitioner has already been granted opportunity to explain this discrepancy by the employer as per Annexure-A-2. The date of birth recorded in the Army record is prior in time. There is presumption that official acts are regularly performed though rebuttable. However, the petitioner has not explained that his date of birth recorded in Military Record was erroneous. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, there is no illegality in issuance of Annexure A-6 by the respondent- State whereby the petitioner has been retired with effect from 31.8.2006. Consequently, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. (R.B. Misra), ACJ. (Rajiv Sharma), J. November 11, 2009. (sck).