A writ petition seeking correction of a petitioner's date of birth was dismissed. The court held that the application was filed well beyond the two-year limitation period prescribed by the Punjab Civil Services Rules, rendering the prayer untenable.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.19960 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision:06.10.2012
Raj Kumar
...... Petitioner
Vs.
Director Public Instructions, Punjab & another
...... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Mr. Vikram Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral)
The petitioner was recruited as an ETT Teacher on 16.01.2002. Presently, the petitioner is holding the post of Hindi Teacher. It has been submitted that a representation was filed on 24.09.2012 (Annexure P-6) seeking correction as regards date of birth in the official record from 06.03.1978 to 11.08.1978.
The present writ petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a writ of Mandamus in terms of directing the respondent/authorities to change his date of birth from the 06.03.1978 to 11.08.1978 in pursuance to the application submitted by the petitioner dated 24.09.2012.
The second relief sought in the present writ petition is with respect to the change of mother's name of the petitioner in the birth certificate at annexure P-1 from Ram Dulari to Parwati Devi. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is confining his prayer only with regard to seeking correction in his date of birth.
The subject as regards seeking correction of date of birth in
respect of government employees is covered in terms of statutory provisions. Note 3 appended to Rule 2.5 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume I, Part I and Rule 7.3 of the Financial Service Rules, Volume I would hold the filed insofar as the prayer raised in the present writ petition is concerned. The aforementioned provisions reads in the following terms:
“ANNEXURE (A)
(Referred to in Rule 2.5 and note 3 thereunder)
1. In regard to the date of birth a declaration of age made at the time or for the purpose of entry into Government service shall, as against the Government employee in question, be deemed to be conclusive unless he applies for correction of his age as recorded within two years from the date of his entry into Government service. Government, however, reserves the right to make a correction in the recorded age of a Government employee at any time against the interest of the service book or in the History of service of a Gazetted Government employee is incorrect and has been incorrectly recorded with the object that the Government employee may derive some unfair advantage therefrom.
2. When a Government employee, within the period allowed, makes an application for the correction of his date of birth as recorded a special enquiry should be held to ascertain his correct age and reference should be made to all available sources of information such as Certified Copies of entries in the municipal birth register, University or School age certificate, Janam Patris or horoscopes. It should, however, be remembered that it is entirely discretionary on the part of the sanctioning authority to refuse or grant such application and no alteration should be allowed unless it has satisfactorily been proved that the date of birth as originally given by the applicant was a bona fide mistake and that he has derived no unfair advantage therefrom.
3. The result of every such enquiry should, in the case of gazette, non-gazetted Government employees be briefly stated
in their service cards, service books and if a correction is sanctioned, the fact should be reported to the AccountantGeneral.”
Similar is the position envisaged by Rule 7.3 of the Punjab Financial Rules Volume I. In fact, Rule 7.3 permits correction of clerical error that too if it is made expeditiously. The said rule read as under:-
“7.3. Every person newly appointed to a service or a post under Government should at the time of appointment declare the date of his birth by the Christian era with confirmatory evidence as far as possible, confirmatory documentary evidence such as Matriculation Certificate, Municipal birth certificate and so on. If the exact date is not known as approximate date may be given. The actual date or the assumed date, determined under note 1 below should be recorded in the History of Service, Service Book, or any other record, that may be kept in respect of the Government employee’s service under Government and once recorded, it cannot be altered except in the case of a clerical error, without the previous orders of Government.”
The aforementioned Rules also come in the way of the petitioner. Firstly, in terms of Note 3 of Rule 2.5 of Punjab Civil Services Rules, Vol. 1 Part 1, the application has been submitted after about 19 years and a plea in the nature of estoppels would operate against the petitioner. Even under Rule 7.3 of the Punjab Financial Rules Vol.1, only clerical error could be permitted to be corrected. The error which is sought to be rectified can by no stretch of imagination be termed as clerical error.”
In terms of such Rule, it is clear that at the time of entry into government service, a declaration as regards date of birth is to be given which would deemed to be conclusive. Any application seeking correction as regards date of birth has to be submitted within two years from the date
of entry in to the government service.
In the light of the admitted position of fact that the request made by the petitioner seeking correction of his date of birth was made only after a period of 10 years after the entry into the government service the prayer made in the present application can not be accepted.
Liberty is, however, granted to the petitioner to avail of any other civil remedy open to him strictly in accordance with law as regards the second prayer pertaining to seeking change of his mother's name in the birth certificate.
Dismissed.
October 06, 2012 (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) harjeet JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a government employee can seek correction of date of birth after the statutory limitation period of two years from entry into service has expired.
Whether a discrepancy in date of birth recorded after decades qualifies as a clerical error warranting correction under applicable rules.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Raj Kumar
Director Public Instructions, Punjab
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
