The High Court dismissed the original petition challenging the setting aside of an Administrative Tribunal order rejecting a request for belated correction of the petitioner's date of birth to prevent adverse impact on junior employees.
Petition dismissed; Tribunal order in O.A. No. 181 of 2014 upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2016/4TH JYAISHTA, 1938
OP (CAT).No. 140 of 2016 (Z)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 181/2014 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 30-09-2015
PETITIONER : APPLICANT :-
POOKOYA N.P
S/O ATTAKOYA, AGED 58, MAKKAYAPURA, ANDROTT-682551, LAKSHADWEEP.
BY ADVS.DR.V.N.SANKARJEE SRI.V.N.MADHUSUDANAN SRI.S.SIDHARDHAN SMT.C.K.LEKHAMMA SMT.R.UDAYA JYOTHI SRI.M.M.VINOD SMT.M.SUSEELA SMT.MARY JOHN
RESPONDENTS :
R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, SC, LAKSHADWEEP ADMN
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (CAT).No. 140 of 2016 (Z)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL.
True copy
P.A to Judge
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.
O.P.(CAT)No.140 of 2016
Dated this the 25th day of May, 2016
JUDGMENT
Anil K.Narendran, J.
The petitioner is the applicant in O.A.No.181 of 2014 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. He has filed the said O.A. seeking an order directing the 2nd respondent to correct his date of birth as 21.7.1956 and to reckon his service on the basis of the date of birth so corrected for getting all service benefits. The Tribunal by Ext.P4 order dated 30.9.2015 dismissed that O.A. holding that the petitioner is
not entitled for correction of date of birth. Para.11 of Ext.P4 order reads thus:-
“11. As pointed out by the learned counsel for respondents, Annexure A-4 is the only representation the applicant could show as an earnest effort for correcting his date of birth. Annexure A-4 is dated 25.06.2012. It is obviously made at the fag end of his service. Although, Annexure A-4 refers to another representation dated 14.06.2006 but no copy of such representation was produced by the applicant. Annexure A-6 also does not
O.P.(CAT)No.140 of 2016
2
seem to be a reliable one because there is nothing to indicate that Annexure A-6 had been acknowledged by the respondents. Taking stock of the facts and circumstance in this case, this Tribunal is of the view that applicant has made a serious effort for correcting his date of birth only when he neared his date of superannuation. Therefore, correcting his date of birth at this belated stage is impermissible, as the same will adversely affect the junior employees and also the prospect of the employees who are waiting for employment in respondents department.
Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P4 order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner is before this Court in this original petition.
O.P.(CAT)No.140 of 2016
3
Assistant at Government High School, Kavaratti and while continuing as such, he was appointed as Language Teacher (Hindi) in the year 1994.
of birth is erroneously entered as 1.6.1955. In order to correct the date of birth in service records he made application before the respondents. In order to support the said request for correction of date of birth as 21.7.1956, the petitioner relied on Annexure A1 certificate issued by the Registrar of Death and Birth, Annexure A2 extract of the admission register issued by the Headmaster of Govt.High School, Andrott and Annexure A3 certificate issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Andrott. However, the said request made in Annexure A5 application was kept pending. It was aggrieved by the same the petitioner has approached the Tribunal in O.A.No.181 of 2014.
O.P.(CAT)No.140 of 2016
4
for correction of date of birth within the stipulated period of five years of entry in Government service and as such his request ought to have been favourably considered. The respondents filed Ext.P3 reply statement, opposing the relief sought for in the O.A.
Kerala 989) a Division Bench of this Court [in which one among us (AKN(J)) is a member] held that, when the prescription of time frame in the system evolved by the Government order for entertaining and disposing of applications for correction of date of birth in service book is part of that system, the application
O.P.(CAT)No.140 of 2016
5
submitted by a Government servant should be considered and disposed of strictly in terms of the said order, the terms of which are binding not only on the Government servants, but also on the Government.
In the above circumstance, we find absolutely no ground to interfere with Ext.P4 order passed by the Tribunal. In the result, the O.P. fails and the same is dismissed.
Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE
skj
True copy
P.A to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal's order dismissing the petition for delayed correction of date of birth should be interfered with.
Whether the petitioner's belated application for correction of date of birth infringes upon junior employees' prospects.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vijayan.K. v. Jacob Job & othersReferred¶51
Vijayan.K. v. Jacob Job & others (ILR 2015 (1) Kerala 989) · Who else cites this
Pookoya N.P
The Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep
The Director of Education, Union Territory of Lakshadweep
P.R.Ramachandran Menon
Anil K.Narendran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
