from the date of her appointment, it was necessary for the petitioner to approach this Court within a reasonable time, if the representations were not decided. The instant petition is, however, filed on 31/12/2014, when the petitioner actually stood superannuated as per the date of birth recorded in the service book. It is also necessary to note that in view of Rule 38 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, an application of change of date of birth should be made within a period of five years from the date of entry in the Government service and it is also stated in the said Rule that when once an entry of age or date of birth has been made in the service book, no alteration of the entry whatsoever should be allowed, unless it is found that the entry was due to want of care on the part of some person other than the individual in question or is an obvious clerical error. The applications annexed by the petitioner to the instant petition do not make a reference to want of care or negligence on the part of the respondent-employer or to an obvious clerical error. In this background, it would not be proper for this Court to interfere with the order of the respondents, declining to correct the date of birth of the petitioner when the petitioner was on the verge of retirement and only a few days of service of the petitioner were left. The judgment reported in 2000 III CLR 125 (Sitaram K. Jawale v. MHADA and Ors.) cannot be made applicable to the facts of this case.
