State of Orissa v. a.Apparao

OJC NO. 3624 of 2000
07. 08.12.2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners-State.

 In this writ petition, the petitioners assail the order dated 23.07.19
99 passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 242(C) of
1994 allowing the application of opposite party for joining his duty and holding that if he is
 certified fit to rejoin his duty by the Medical Board, the intervening period after he was ou
t of service shall be treated as duty and he shall be entitled to all service benefit.

 Brief facts of the case are that the opposite party, namely, A. Appara
o, initially joined in service on 01.01.1964 as Truck Driver under the Executive Engineer, Sto
res and Mechanical Division, Balimela Dam Project, Chitrakonda and joined in service on 01.01.
1964 and thereafter, he joined on 19.01.1977 in Upper Kolab Project under Upper Kolab Mechanic
al Sub-Division No.II. The main thrust of the dispute is with regard to recording the date of
birth of the opposite party in his service book as 15.01.1934 instead of 26.2.1943, when he wa
s entered into service on 01.01.1964.

 It is submitted by learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State-pet
itioners that the date of birth of the opposite party was recorded in his service book as 15.0
1.1934 when he was 30 years of age basing on the educational qualification, which was authenti
cated by the then S.D.O., Transport and Garrage on13.08.1966. In his service book, the opposi
te party has put his signature in English. Further, a common seniority list was published show
ing the date of birth of the opposite party as 15.01.1934. After publication of the gradation
 list, the opposite party had never protested about his date of birth at any point of time.
It is further submitted that Rule 65 of OGFR Vol. I (F.D. No. 42151/F dated 28.9.1992) provide
s that any application for effecting change in the date of birth shall be summarily rejected,
if the same is filed after five years of entry into Government service. But, in the instant c
ase, the opposite party had applied for change of his date of birth after completion of five y
ears. Hence, he has prayed to set aside the impugned order passed by learned Tribunal holding
 the date of birth of the opposite party to be 26.2.1943 instead of 15.01.1934.