CWP No. 1544 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 1544 of 2007 Date of decision: September 17, 2008 Devinder Kumar Sethi --- Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ---- Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajan Gupta Present: Mr. PK Kukreja, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 4. Ashutosh Mohunta, J. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of orders Annexures P1 and P2, vide which request of the petitioner for change of his date of birth from 3-3-1949 to 3-2-1951 was rejected. The petitioner joined the services with the respondents as Proof Reader on 25-2-1969. At the time of joining, he gave his date of birth as 3-3-1949. On 7-12-1994 he approached the respondents for change of his date of birth. Thereafter he filed various representations and applications in this regard, which have now been rejected vide impugned orders Annexures P1 & P2. CWP No. 1544 of 2007 2 In the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4, it has been averred that since the petitioner has applied for correction of his date of birth highly belatedly i.e. after more than 30 years of his appointment, he is not entitled to the relief claimed. Counsel for the respondents has placed reliance upon the decision in Union of India v. Kantilal Hematram Pandya, JT 1995(2) SC 365, wherein it has been observed in paras 5 & 9 as under: 5. This Court in Harnam Singh's case held, “___ the law of limitation may operate harshly but it has to be applied with all its rigour and the courts or tribunals cannot come to the aid of those who sleep over their rights and allow the period of limitation to expire. Unless altered, his date of birth as recorded would determine his date of superannuation even if it amounts to abridging his right to continue in service on the basis of his actual age.” “9. _____ The respondent slept over his rights to get the date of birth altered for more than thirty years and woke up from his deep slumber on the eve of his retirement only. The law laid down by this Court in Harnam Singh's case ( supra) was, thus, fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case of the respondent and the Tribunal failed to follow the same without eve pointing out any distinguishing features on facts. Stale claims and belated applications for alteration of the date of birth recorded in the service book at the time of initial entry, made after unexplained and inordinate delay, on the eve of retirement, need to be scrutinized carefully and interference made sparingly and with circumspection. The approach has to be cautious and not casual. On facts, the respondent was not entitled to CWP No. 1544 of 2007 3 the relief which the Tribunal granted to him. The order of the Tribunal is erroneous and the directions issued by it cannot be sustained____”. In another case titled `The Secretary & Commissioner, Home Department & others v. R. Kirubakaran', JT 1993 (5) SC 404, it has been observed as under: “___ whenever an application for alteration of the date of birth is made on the eve of superannuation or near about that time, the Court or the Tribunal concerned should be more cautious because of the growing tendency amongst a section of public servants, to raise such a dispute, without explaining as to why this question was not raised earlier. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is not possible to uphold the finding recorded by the Tribunal.” In view of the fact that the petitioner has approached the respondents for change of his date of birth highly belatedly i.e. almost at the fag end of his career, no relief can be granted to him. The question involved in this writ petition being a disputed question of facts cannot be gone into this writ petition. Finding no merit, the writ petition is dismissed. [Ashutosh Mohunta] Judge [Rajan Gupta] Judge September 17, 2008 `ask' CWP No. 1544 of 2007 4