Dismissed

Narpat Singh Son of Shri Rewat Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC26 Sept 2023CW/1478/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking correction of the petitioner's date of birth in his service record from 1959 to 1963. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that such correction cannot be entertained at the fag end of a career after a long delay, as it undermines the service records and promotions of juniors.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed. Stay applications and pending applications dismissed. No costs.

Narpat Singh Son of Shri Rewat Singh Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1478/2019

¶3

Narpat Singh Son Of Shri Rewat Singh, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of Azad Chowk, Barmer.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief Secretary To The Government, Woman And Child Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

The Director, Integrated Child Development Services, Rajasthan, 2, Jal Path, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur.

¶8

The Child Development Project Officer, Barmer Rural, Barmer.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prahlad Singh For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order

¶12

26/09/2023 Reportable

¶13

For correction of date of birth at the fag end of retirement, the petitioner has woke up and has approached this Court by way of filing this petition with the following prayer:

¶14

“(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the inaction and omission on the part of the respondents in the matter of correction/amendment of the date of birth of the petitioner from 01.10.1959 to 14.12.1963 may kindly be declared to be illegal and the same may be quashed and set aside and the respondents may kindly be directed to make amendment/correction in the date of birth of the petitioner in the service record from 01.10.1959 to 14.12.1963 and correct date of birth may kindly be ordered to be recorded

¶15

[CW-1478/2019]

¶16

(2 of 9)

¶17

in the service record of the petitioner and the respondents may kindly be directed to accord all service benefits to the petitioner taking into consideration his correct date of birth 14.12.1963; (ii) any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner;

¶18

(iii) costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.”

¶19

Contents of the petition indicates that by way of filing instant petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the respondents to make correction of the date of birth in his service record from 01.10.1959 to 14.12.1963. At the time of entry of the petitioner in service his date of birth was mentioned as 01.10.1959 and when the petitioner was at the verge of retirement, he approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition for issuing directions against the respondent to correct his date of birth as 14.12.1963 on the basis of his Horoscope in which his correct date of birth is mentioned as 14.12.1963.

¶20

No authentic document is available on the record to show the date of birth of the petitioner as 14.12.1963 and the same is disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court while exercising its powers contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶21

The law with regard to change in date of birth is well established by the Hon’ble Apex Court on various occasions. Such change can be done as per the relevant Rules / Regulations. Such change cannot be claimed as a matter of right even if sufficient evidence is available in this regard. But in any case such change

¶22

(3 of 9) [CW-1478/2019]

¶23

cannot be allowed at the time of retirement on attaining the age of superannuation.

¶24

In the case of Home Deptt. v. R. Kirubakaran reported in 1994 Supp (1) SCC 155, it is observed and held by Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:

¶25

“7. An application for correction of the date of birth should not be dealt with by the Tribunal or the High Court keeping in view only the public servant concerned. It need not be pointed out that any such direction for correction of the date of birth of the public servant concerned has a chain reaction, inasmuch as others waiting for years, below him for their respective promotions are affected in this process. Some are likely to suffer irreparable injury, inasmuch as, because of the correction of the date of birth, the officer concerned, continues in office, in some cases for years, within which time many officers who are below him in seniority waiting for their promotion, may lose the promotion for ever.”

¶26

In the case of State of M.P. v. Premlal Shrivas , reported in 2011 (9) SCC 664 in paragraph 8 and 12, it is observed and held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:

¶27

“8. It needs to be emphasised that in matters involving correction of date of birth of a government servant, particularly on the eve of his superannuation or at the fag end of his career, the court or the tribunal has to be circumspect, cautious and careful while issuing direction for correction of date of birth, recorded in the service book at the time of entry into any government service. Unless the court or the tribunal is fully satisfied on the basis of the irrefutable proof relating to his date of birth and that such a claim is made in accordance with the procedure prescribed or as per the consistent

¶28

(4 of 9)

¶29

[CW-1478/2019]

¶30

procedure adopted by the department concerned, as the case may be, and a real injustice has been caused to the person concerned, the court or the tribunal should be loath to issue a direction for correction of the service book. Time and again this Court has expressed the view that if a government servant makes a request for correction of the recorded date of birth after lapse of a long time of his induction into the service, particularly beyond the time fixed by his employer, he cannot claim, as a matter of right, the correction of his date of birth, even if he has good evidence to establish that the recorded date of birth is clearly erroneous. No court or the tribunal can come to the aid of those who sleep over their rights.

¶31

Be that as it may, in our opinion, the delay of over two decades in applying for the correction of date of birth is ex facie fatal to the case of the Respondent, notwithstanding the fact that there was no specific Rule or order, framed or made, prescribing the period within which such application could be filed. It is trite that even in such a situation such an application should be filed which can be held to be reasonable. The application filed by the Respondent 25 years after his induction into service, by no standards, can be held to be reasonable, more so when not a feeble attempt was made to explain the said delay. There is also no substance in the plea of the Respondent that since Rule 84 of the M.P. Financial Code does not prescribe the time-limit within which an application is to be filed, the Appellants were duty-bound to correct the clerical error in recording of his date of birth in the service book.”

¶32

In the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India and Ors. v. R. Basavaraju reported in 2016 (15)SCC 781 , it is observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:

¶33

[CW-1478/2019]

¶34

(5 of 9)

¶35

“5. The law with regard to correction of date of birth has been time and again discussed by this Court and held that once the date of birth is entered in the service record, as per the educational certificates and accepted by the employee, the same cannot be changed. Not only that, this Court has also held that a claim for change in date of birth cannot be entertained at the fag end of retirement.”

¶36

In the case of Bharat Coking Coal Limited and Ors.

¶37

v. Shyam Kishore Singh reported in 2020 (3) SCC 411, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed and held in paragraph 9 & 10 as under:

¶38

This Court has consistently held that the request for change of the date of birth in the service records at the fag end of service is not sustainable. The learned Additional Solicitor General has in that regard relied on the decision in the case of State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Gorakhnath Sitaram Kamble (2010) 14 SCC 423 wherein a series of the earlier decisions of this Court were taken note and was held as hereunder:

¶39

The learned Counsel for the Appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in U.P. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad v. Raj Kumar Agnihotri, (2005) 11 SCC 465 . In this case, this Court has considered a number of judgments of this Court and observed that the grievance as to the date of birth in the service record should not be permitted at the fag end of the service career.

¶40

In another judgment in State of Uttaranchal v. Pitamber Dutt Semwal, (2005) 11 SCC 477 relief was denied to the government employee on the ground that he sought correction in the service record after nearly 30 years of service. While setting aside the judgment of the High Court, this Court observed that the High Court ought not to have interfered

¶41

[CW-1478/2019]

¶42

(6 of 9)

¶43

with the decision after almost three decades.

¶44

These decisions lead to a different dimension of the case that correction at the fag end would be at the cost of a large number of employees, therefore, any correction at the fag end must be discouraged by the court. The relevant portion of the judgment in Home Deptt. v. R. Kirubakaran, 1994 Supp (1) SCC 155 reads as under: (SCC pp. 158 59, para 7)

¶45

An application for correction of the date of birth [by a public servant cannot be entertained at the fag end of his service]. It need not be pointed out that any such direction for correction of the date of birth of the public servant concerned has a chain reaction, inasmuch as others waiting for years, below him for their respective promotions are affected in this process. Some are likely to suffer irreparable injury, inasmuch as, because of the correction of the date of birth, the officer concerned, continues in office, in some cases for years, within which time many officers who are below him in seniority waiting for their promotion, may lose their promotion forever.... According to us, this is an important aspect, which cannot be lost sight of by the court or the tribunal while examining the grievance of a public servant in respect of correction of his date of birth. As such, unless a clear case on the basis of materials which can be held to be conclusive in nature, is made out by the Respondent, the court or the tribunal should not issue a direction, on the basis of materials which make such claim only plausible. Before any such direction is issued, the court or the tribunal must be fully satisfied that there has been real injustice to the person concerned and his claim for correction of date of birth has been made in accordance with the procedure prescribed, and within the time fixed by any Rule or order.... the

¶46

[CW-1478/2019]

¶47

(7 of 9)

¶48

onus is on the applicant to prove the wrong recording of his date of birth, in his service book.

¶49

This Court in fact has also held that even if there is good evidence to establish that the recorded date of birth is erroneous, the correction cannot be claimed as a matter of right. In that regard, in State of M.P. v. Premlal Shrivas , (Supra) it is held as hereunder:

¶50

It needs to be emphasised that in matters involving correction of date of birth of a government servant, particularly on the eve of his superannuation or at the fag end of his career, the court or the tribunal has to be circumspect, cautious and careful while issuing direction for correction of date of birth, recorded in the service book at the time of entry into any government service. Unless the court or the tribunal is fully satisfied on the basis of the irrefutable proof relating to his date of birth and that such a claim is made in accordance with the procedure prescribed or as per the consistent procedure adopted by the department concerned, as the case may be, and a real injustice has been caused to the person concerned, the court or the tribunal should be loath to issue a direction for correction of the service book. Time and again this Court has expressed the view that if a government servant makes a request for correction of the recorded date of birth after lapse of a long time of his induction into the service, particularly beyond the time fixed by his employer, he cannot claim, as a matter of right, the correction of his date of birth, even if he has good evidence to establish that the recorded date of birth is clearly erroneous. No court or the tribunal can come to the aid of those who sleepover their rights" (see Union of India v. Harnam Singh, 1998 (2) SCC 162 ).

(8 of 9)

[CW-1478/2019]

Be that as it may, in our opinion, the delay of over two decades in applying for the correction of date of birth is ex facie fatal to the case of the Respondent, notwithstanding the fact that there was no specific Rule or order, framed or made, prescribing the period within which such application could be filed. It is trite that even in such a situation such an application should be filed which can be held to be reasonable. The application filed by the Respondent 25 years after his induction into service, by no standards, can be held to be reasonable, more so when not a feeble attempt was made to explain the said delay. There is also no substance in the plea of the Respondent that since Rule 84 of the M.P. Financial Code does not prescribe the time-limit within which an application is to be filed, the Appellants were duty-bound to correct the clerical error in recording of his date of birth in the service book.

¶55

In the case of Karnataka Rural Infrastructure

¶56

Development Limited vs. T.P. Nataraja and Ors. reported in 2021 (12) SCC 27 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in para 11 and 12 as under:

¶57

“11. Considering the aforesaid decisions of this Court the law on change of date of birth can be summarized as under:

¶58

(i) application for change of date of birth can only be as per the relevant provisions/Regulations applicable;

¶59

(ii) even if there is cogent evidence, the same cannot be claimed as a matter of right;

¶60

(iii) application can be rejected on the ground of delay and latches also more particularly when it is made at the fag end of service and/or when the employee is

¶61

[CW-1478/2019]

¶62

(9 of 9)

¶63

about to retire on attaining the age of superannuation”

¶64

Therefore, applying the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions, the application of the Respondent for change of date of birth was liable to be rejected on the ground of delay and laches also and therefore as such Respondent employee was not entitled to the decree of declaration and therefore the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is unsustainable and not tenable at law.”

¶65

In view of the above judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, as referred above, it is safely held that any request for alteration of date of birth cannot be made after a long delay and especially towards the end of the career of an employee. Such employee cannot wake up from his slumber after a long time and seek alteration of date of birth toward the fag end of his career.

¶66

Resultantly, the petition being sans substratum is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed. Stay applications and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed. 12. No Costs.

¶67

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶68

KuD/44

Narpat Singh Son of Shri Rewat Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narpat Singh Son of Shri Rewat Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhanraj Choudhary Vs the District Collector and Ors.

Mahaveer Prasad Vs Municipal Board Nawalgarh Ors.

Dr Gangadhar Mittal Vs State Medical and Health Depors

Swati Indoria Daughter of Babu Lal Vs Rajasthan Subordinate and Ministerial Service Selection Board

Kamlesh Kumar Jaiman Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Bhairu Lal Son of Shri Bhanwar Lal Vs Assistant Engineer, Sawan Bhado Pariyojna