High Court Of A.P vs N. Sanyasi Rao

2. The respondent - N. Sanyasi Rao (hereinafter referred to as the " Judicial Officer") - was selected in the judicial service of the State of Andhra Pradesh and was given an order of appointment as District Munsif. In pursuance thereof, he joined the service on October 7, 1985.

4. In 1983, before the application for recruitment to the Judicial service was made by the Judicial Officer, he had filed a suit (O.S. No. 61 of 1983) seeking declaration that his date of birth is March 29, 1953 and not July 1, 1949 and for direction to the concerned authorities to make necessary alterations in the school, college and University records. After conclusion of the trial in the suit and on hearing the parties, the Principal District Munsif at Chodavaram decreed the suit and held that the Judicial Officer was entitled to the declaration of his date of birth as March 29, 1953.

5. Thus, when the Judicial Officer joined the service on October 7, 1985, he referred to the decree dated February 28, 1985 (for short "decree") and declared his date of birth as March 29, 1953. The District Judge, Visakhapatnam, after the Judicial Officer had joined the service on October 7, 1985, opened his service register on December 30, 1985 and recorded his date of birth as March 29, 1953 based on the decree and also showed his date of birth as July 1, 1949 based on the Secondary School Leaving Certificate.

6. In 1989, after the alteration was made in the education certificates in compliance of the decree, the Judicial Officer made a representation to the Registrar, High Court 3 for the correct recording of his date of birth. The representation was sent through concerned District Judge. The representation made by the Judicial Officer was kept pending for years together. On October 15, 1997, the High Court on the administrative side passed a Resolution (hereinafter referred to as the "Resolution) rejecting the representation made by the Judicial Officer and he was communicated of the Resolution on December 11, 1997. The Judicial Officer sought review of the decision taken by the High Court on the administrative side and that, we are informed, has never been disposed of till today. Since the decision on Judicial Officer's request for review of the Resolution was not taken within reasonable time, the Judicial Officer moved the High Court on the judicial side by filing a Writ Petition challenging the Resolution.

4) The date of birth determined under this rule shall be entered in the service record of the employees concerned duly attested by the Head of the Office or the officer who maintains the service records and date of birth so entered shall be final and binding and the Government employee shall be estopped from disputing the correctness of such date of birth.

5) The date of birth as determined and entered in the service record shall not be altered except in case of bona fide clerical error, under the orders of Government."

17. The Division Bench, accordingly, requested the High Court on the administrative side to consider and dispose of M. Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy's representation. Pursuant thereto, the High Court on the administrative side took up the representation of M. Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy along with the representations of 24 other Judicial Officers (including the representation of the present Judicial Officer) and passed the Resolution on October 15, 1997 11 rejecting the representations made by M.Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy and the present Judicial Officer.

19. Dealing with the appeal arising from that order, this Court found no justification in interfering with the order of the Division Bench and the appeal preferred by the Andhra Pradesh High Court on the administrative side was dismissed by this Court on July 22, 2010.

22. We, accordingly, dispose of this appeal by the following order:

23. The impugned order is modified as indicated above. No order as to costs.