The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging Rule 17 of BHEL's Standing Orders regarding date of birth rectification as violating Article 14. The court held the rule setting a time limit for correction was neither arbitrary nor discriminatory and upheld the challenge failure.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.12.2017
CORAM
The HON'BLE MS.INDIRA BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND
The HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
W.P.No.31348 of 2017
A.Selvaraji .. Petitioner
vs.
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Boiler Auxiliaries Plant, Ranipet – 632 406, Vellore District. .. Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of declaration declaring that Rule 17 of the Standing Order of the respondent is arbitrary violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India and direct the respondent to rectify his date of birth as 17.10.1962 as per the birth certificate dated 03.07.2014 issued by the Sub Registrar, Walaja Nagar in M.S.No.748 of 2014 and M.S.No.858 of 2014 instead of his date of birth 17.8.1960 registered in the Service Record of the respondent in pursuance of his representation dated 05.7.2014.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rathanavel
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
This writ petition has been filed by an employee of Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited seeking declaration that Rule 17 of the Standing Order of Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited (hereinafter referred to as “BHEL”) is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The writ petitioner has also sought directions on BHEL to rectify the date of birth entered in the service records of
the petitioner on the basis of a birth certificate dated 03.7.2014 issued by the Sub Registrar, Walaja Nagar in M.S.No.748 of 2014 and M.S.No.858 of 2014.
Every employee must declare on his first appointment or on being required to do so by the Management, his date of birth according to the Christian Era and produce confirmatory documentary evidence, e.g. Matriculation Certificate or Municipal/Police/Birth Certificate etc., and in the absence there of, such evidence as may be acceptable to the Management. If any employee is unable to produce documentary evidence of his age, he shall make a written declaration regarding his age. The date of birth once recorded in the Service Book/sheet of the employee as stated above will not be altered except in the case of clerical error, or on production of proof acceptable to the management provided that the proof is produced within one year of the date on which the original date of birth was recorded in the service book/sheet.”
of India. The grounds in support of the prayer for declaration of Rule 17 of the Standing Orders as ultra vires are wholly misconceived and devoid of merit. The challenge fails.
“Rule 38(2)(f): When once an entry of age or date of birth has been made in a service book no alteration of the entry should afterwards be allowed, unless it is known, 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 Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside the order of the High Court under appeal holding that the approach of the High Court in rewriting the Rules could not be approved or sustained. By necessary implication, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of a Rule setting a time limit for rectification of the date of birth recorded at the time of appointment in service.
The writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar bbr TO The Board of Directors, Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Ranipet – 632 406, Vellore District.
W.P.No.31348of 2017
RR(CO) EU(09/01/2018 )
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Rule 17 of the Standing Orders of Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, which sets a time limit for rectification of date of birth, is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for rectifying his date of birth in service records based on a birth certificate issued years after appointment.
Whether the challenge to the validity of the Standing Order rule concerning date of birth rectification succeeds.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Maharashtra and another v. Gorakhnath Sitaram Kamble and othersReferred¶26
(2010) 14 SCC 423 · Who else cites this
State of Maharashtra and another v. Gorakhnath Sitaram Kamble and othersReferred¶26
Rule 38(2)(f) of Maharashtra Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981
3 provisions across 2 enactments
A. Selvaraji
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited
Indira Banerjee
R. Hemalatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
