MAHETTAR SAHU Vs. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, S.E.C.L. & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, by this petition seeks a writ/ direction to the respondents to correct his date of birth as 1.1.1955. The brief facts, in nutshell, are that the petitioner was appointed on 22.8.1973 in the service of the respondents/South Eastern Coalfields Limited. The date of birth of the petitioner, in the service book, was recorded as 1.1.1944. Without any demur, the petitioner continued in service. The petitioner challenged his date of birth for the first time on 23.7.2001 by making a representation (Annexure P/3), just two years before his date of retirement i.e. 31st December, 2003. After making the representation in July, 2001 the petitioner did not take any steps raising the dispute of his date of birth. The petitioner, in support of his case, has produced a certificate (Annexure P/1), issued on 10.10.1997, by the Gram Panchayat regarding his date of birth as 1.1.1955 and one affidavit dated 9.6.2003 (Annexure P/2). Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner has raised the dispute at the fag end of his service career and this petition has been filed 15 days before the date of his retirement.

(2.) IT is well settled principle of law that the date of birth recorded in the service book is to be taken as final, unless there are some effective, genuine documents, contrary to the records, as produced. The petitioner has not produced any other certificate like the certificate issued at the time of his birth. The certificate produced is dated 10.10.1997 and the affidavit is dated 9.6.2003. Even after obtaining the certificate from the Gram Panchayat, the petitioner has not taken any steps till making the representation to the authorities in July. 2001. On perusal of the papers, it appears that there is no sufficient and convincing evidence, produced by the petitioner to grant him benefit of almost 11 years, at the fag end of service career. The petitioner has worked for about 30 years in service. The petitioner cannot be permitted at the fag end of his career to challenge the entry in his service record of the date of birth. The right to get the date of birth corrected either on the basis of matriculation certificate or otherwise is not a legal right for less a constitutional right. Any claim regarding correction of the date of birth should not be made or entertained after decades, especially on the even of superannuation of the employee. The Supreme Court in the matter of U. P. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and others Vs. Raj Kumar Agnihotri : (2005) 11 SCC 465 observed as under: It is thus seen from the above quote judgments that this Court has consistently taken the view that correction in entries made in government records on the basis of which the government servant got the service cannot be allowed to be changed just a few years before retirement or at the fag end of his retirement. Applying the above stated principle of law to the fact of the present case, it is admitted that the entry of date of birth of the petitioner in the service record was made as '1.1.1944', when the petitioner was appointed on 22.8.1973. At the fag end of his service career the petitioner made a representation on 23.7.2001 (Annexure P/3) for correction of date of birth as '1.1.1955' on the basis of alleged certificate (Annexure P/1), issued by the Gram Panchayat on 10.10.1997. The petitioner has not adduced any cogent evidence to indicate as to what prevented him from raising the issue earlier. The petitioner kept waiting till he made a representation on 23.7.2001 about two years before the date of his retirement i.e. 31.12.2003. The petitioner has not made out a case for interference with a correction of date of birth, as recorded in his service book.

(3.) IN view of the foregoing, I do not find any merit in this petition. The petition deserves to be and is dismissed, accordingly. No order as to ' costs.