IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1619 of 2011 Murlidhar Mahto SON OF SATUR MAHTO, RESIDENT OF BARDELA, UNDER GRAM PANCHAYAT BARDELA TARAUNI, P.S. DHAMDAHA, PURNEA. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PURNIA. 4. THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, PURNEA. 5. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, PURNIA. ----------- 2 29/06/2011 Candidature of the petitioner was rejected on the post of Panchayat Sewak by the respondent district authorities on the ground that the appointment of the petitioner on the initial post of Dalpati was obtained on a wrong date of birth. Petitioner was appointed as a Dalpati on the ground of certificate obtained from a so called Middle School indicating a particular date of birth. Petitioner also decided to enhance his qualification because he had sat for matriculation examination and a different date of birth was mentioned in his matriculation certificate. There is variance in the initial certificate obtained from the Middle School as well as the matriculation certificate. When the turn of the petitioner came for appointment on - 2 - the post of Panchayat Sewak, the authorities verified the position and tumbled upon this evidence that the petitioner had obtained employment on the post of Dalpati when he was not even 21 years of age. Petitioner wants now to wash away or give-up his date of birth indicated by the Bihar School Examination Board in the matriculation examination. He would like the respondents to stick to the initial birth certificate given by him. The question which arises is whether petitioner can be permitted to pick and choose a date of birth according to his convenience? There cannot be a variable date of birth of a person. Disputes of such a kind have arisen before this Court and at times taken to the Supreme Court and the Courts, on many a occasion, held that the actual date of birth to which a person will be pinned down will be the date of birth indicated in the matriculation examination. It does not take too much to offer to hold that the earlier certificate of middle pass which was produced by the petitioner was spur of moment management done by him to enter the post of Dalpati. Now other facts have emerged with regard to the petitioner’s matriculation - 3 - certificate giving another date of birth. Obviously, it has to be taken into consideration by the authority while giving him benefit of appointment of a permanent kind under the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to a decision which has been rendered in yet another writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 17453 of 2009 disposed of on 28.04.2010 which is annexure-6. In this case the Court directed constitution of a Medical Board to assess the age of that petitioner because there was variance in Madhyama certificate and the middle school certificate produced by him. This Court has certain reservation on innovating or constitution of a Medical Board to assess the age of the petitioner when there is un-impeachable evidence with regard to the date of birth of the petitioner by way of matriculation examination. He will have to be pinned down to the date of birth given by the Bihar School Examination Board at the time when the petitioner appeared in such examination and when the certificate was issued. There is nothing to indicate from the materials on record that there was any occasion or steps - 4 - taken by the petitioner to ensure that the certificate of the middle school or matriculation certificate were synchronized or corrected. If that was not done for decades, petitioner has no remedy now. This writ application lacks merit. It is dismissed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)