Allowed

K.Ramulu, Apsrtc, Zonal Workshop, Karimnagar v. Apsrtc., Rep.by Its M.D., Musheerabad, Hyderabad and Another

Telangana HC11 Apr 2023WP/13516/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a declaration that office orders terminating his service were illegal due to a change in his recorded date of birth near retirement. The court held that date of birth cannot be altered at the fag-end of a career and allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; Petitioner's date of birth restored to 30.06.1949; Respondents directed to pay salary for period 28.02.2006 to 30.06.2007 and consequential benefits.

K.Ramulu, Apsrtc, Zonal Workshop… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁷ ]

¶2

HIGI{ COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ART HYDERABAD

¶3

(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 13516 OF 2007

¶8

Between:

¶9

K.Ramulu (E.39663), S/o.Sailoo, Ex-Driver^(Grade-l) APSRTC, zonal workshop' Karimnagar'

¶10

...pETrroNER

¶11

AND

¶12

A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, rep. by rts^lrilanagrng Director,^{RTC 'X'} Roads, Musheerabad, Hydeiabad.

¶13

The Works Manager, Zonal workshops. APSRTC^Kartmnagar

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutron of^{lndia praytng} that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^filed therewith,^{the HighCourt may be} pleased to issue a writ or order or direction especially one ln the nature of writ of mandamus:

¶16

i. declaring the office order^{No P3/255(12)/2005-WM KR dated} 19.9.2005 notification dt lP2l693(31t2005-WL^{KR dated 2'l 9 2005} and consequential^{proceedrngNo P31255(12)12005'Wt\ilKR dated} 6.3.2007 issued by the^{2ndrespondent as illegal. and arbrtrary,}

¶17

ii. consequently direct the^{respondentsto treat as rf the petitioneris} continued in service from^{1 3} 2006 to^{30 6 2007 duly granting all} other consequential benefits such^{as payment of wagesand} fixation of all terminal benefits accordingly

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI.^K. VASUDEVA^REODY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI GADDAM^{SRINIVAS (SC FOR TSRTC)}

¶20

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶21

{ ti : : i j I i , I ;

¶22

Tr IE H )N',BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHIjK Il EDI)Y

¶23

WRIT PETITION No. 13516 of 2007

¶24

()RDEII:

¶25

SL,ekrrr,, to cleclarc the office order date([ 19.t)t).]:t105,^tltc' Notilicatiorr 1ate.l 21.09.2005, and the consequentral pro eerlirrgs (i.itc(l^()(,.0 1.: t)()7 issuecl by the respondent No.2, ,rs ill,'gal anrl a llritrarr', tlrc pr,:titioner has filed the present writ pe it on

¶26

It is tlr' ,:ast of the petitioner that he rvas ,tp1'ointt'cl as ;t ( lt'ancr in lll r.esponde.r-rt Corporation on 01.03.197 I l'h r'rt'.r I tt'r, lrt' rvas :.rirrn^rhrcl as l)river in 7974. It is stated that a.t thc tiurc o[ aPlr(jrttnt(' tt the pctitiolter was referred to a \4erlir.rl O[l.rr'er, rr'lro ,,r.rrnrn,cl him ancl determined the date of L.iltl oI tlrc p('titi,rn('r .rsⁱ⁰ 06.1949, ancl the said date of birtlr \.1'^{('rit!'r'r'ri} irr his \t'r', irt' icgister (l).Case). Based on the ;ai-l cnlrt', tlte n'sp.rontit'r'rt Ir rr.2 has issued a Certificate conlinrtint thc tlatc ttI birLh ol Ilrc petitiouer as 30.06.1949. Desprte tht sa rtr', tlrt' r(,s[)()nLl,,n[ \ rr. 2 lras isstrccl office order dated 19.09.](r05,rltcring tlrt' tl.rtc c,I l, rth of the Pc'titioner as 04.02.1918. ]'lr,-''t'altct, the r(,sp()r)(l(,r'rt ) o 2 Iras issuecl the Notificatior datctl ll 09 l(l(ll lt'tirinli lhr' P'titicrncr frotn service w.e.f 28.011.2006 as it lrt' lras

¶27

¶28

attained the age of superannuation. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has made a representation dated 02.02.2007 to the respondent No.2 requesting them to reinstate him back into service duly treating his date of birdr as 30.06.7949. However, the respondent No.Z dde the proceedings dated 06.03.2007 has rcjected the request of the petitioner duly treating his tlatc of birth as 04.02.L948. Hence, the present writ lrctitiorl

¶29

Heard both sides and perused the recorcl.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner [ras stated that the pctitioner has been working in the respondcrrt Corporatiorr from 1977 and all along his date of birth was show,tt iu thc Servicc Record as 30.06.7949. That as per the original ri.rte of birth shon'tr in the service record, the petitioner was cluc to rctirc on 30.06.2W7. However, at the fag-end of scrvicc carcer of thc lretitioner,^{the respondent No.2 has altereci the clate of birth of thc} pctitioner from 30.06.1949 ro 04.02.7948 anrl f-rrcntaturely retirc'd him from service on 28.02.2006, which is contrary to thc' wc[[ established 1-:rinciples of law and the^juclgrrcnts of the Hon'trle Supreme Court as well as this Court. ln su1'rport of his

¶31

¶32

contentl()n., k,arrrecl counscI has relied upon a]1 unreportecl jutlgrnent rr Kolle Rnitrtrr os. The Sitgarcni Collierie,s C ourptrtrrl Li trti terl rtttrl , '^{t lterst}

¶33

I1,r , o rtra, tlre k'arnerl Standing Counsel rp:earing or.t bt'ltalf ol I rt, rt'sponr['1t Corporation has vehernelt,y epp95;g1[ th(, ,er), .r.rir-ta r^.r['rilit' ()f the writ petition. The k:ar-rcci Sta.cli.g Corrrrst l lr,r -^. a Lctl tlr.rt at thc time of appointntent, th<, pt,titiont r has gir,,r,n a s,'ll-tle,cl.tratiorr regarding his date, of I irth as 04.02..l94S .: rrt tlro s(ln1() rvas attestecl by a Gazetted C.,ffir er. l.ltc lea rner,l Stani. rnri Courrsel has further stated that t,s per the Cit'ul.tr ln.Ir rt tior.rs arr,-l the Regulations of the l.:spondcr-rt f 11 1'1-r1r1,1[ 11r 11, lrl tlatt, ttI Lrirth of the petitioner irr tlrt: ]ervicc Rt't'orcl rr',ts r.^,r lit'tl rvilI tltat of the self-dec larlti6r.r 13i,,,en [rt, hirrr, as tlrt'r'r, r, .r., r,aliatiorr ir-r the clate of birth, the darc of lrirtlt of t[rt' Pctitr,rrtct \'r.i c()rr(rctc'rl as 04.02.1948, in te:nrs of th. Rt'1,,Lrl.ttiorr..^q r tlrc rt'spontlent Corporation anc tht sclfcler'l,rratirrn 1,ir',n Lrr,'tht,Ps1111611s..^'l-herefore, l)raye(l this Corrrt to tlisnris. tit, I r.( \cnt rvrit pi'tition.

¶34

rOrrlerdaterl 2t 17 2(08 passr:d in writ petition No.13g45 of 2O0g by a learr ed Single Judgo oF er st^vh [e Hrgh Court of Judicature, Andhra pradesl] at tj\ider rbad

¶35

¶36

A perusal of the record shows that the date of birth of the petitioner was entered in the Service Record as 30.06.1949, based on the Medical Celtificate dated 30.06.1971 issued by the Medical Officer of the respondent Corporation.

¶37

This Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court irr catena o[ cases, has consistently held that the date of birth in the service rccord cannot be changed at the fag-end of the care'er of thc. erlploygg. At the time of entry into the service, the cmprlovce will clcclarc his date of birth based on some acceptable c'locurnents in support of the said date of birth and on the basis of whiclr cntry is nracle. [f any correction is to be made, the same has to ['c clone rvithirr the time prescribed in the rules and regulations. This has lrt'cn consistent view of the Hon ble Supreme Court arrtl \ra ous othcr I{igh Courts. The said preposition of law will apply to both the cr-nployee and the employer.

¶38

ti. [rr this particular case, even though the petitioner had cntered the service in the year 1971,, the date of birth was sought tcr be clranged after a period of almost 34 years, which is not l'rclmissiblc^{uuder law. Moreover, the clate of biltlt oI thcr}

¶39

¶40

I t i

¶41

petitionr: r \r rs crltercrd in tlrr. Service Ilecorcl as 3().[)t.1919, basecl on the ,rq,.,⁽ ctcrmincct bt' the MedicaI Officer of thr respondent Corpor;rti:rn []ut for thc r('.lsol1s best known to th:^{'es]rondents,} at no |oi rt ol trnrr., thet, have'sought to correct tlr: s,rme, but, onlv on tlrr' 'r't' ol- rctircrlcr-tt of the petitioner, the rlate of birth of thc petitirrn, r rr,.rs chanllccl f1om 30.06.1949 lo l)4.1)219.18, which cannot bc pr rnr il teci

¶42

I-hrs .l,rurt irr Kollc Rrtjntt/s case (supra , has; held as u ncler

¶43

"Iti'in ,1n11,,,^pl nlttrrl llnl tlr n!.1, o.f tltL' l.trtitiottct-, ns on tlt: dnte of i{r y,r'.,/r r, / r, -'S t);. /91{), is nrulitntul rn tlte Se -i,i-c Rook, li lir,gr. 'tt^{rttrrl It[,'ttltlrl/]rrrrrrl rrs 25 ynrs'l'/.(tx} lltet dotru,uts lrt! n\ uult,nil ut llk LontL,rt ttf leh'rntinitry iln' htt of ttl ol Iltr L'tttltllp ll ilu' ttt'trlq 32 yetrs hfu thnl the '/r \ \r)r/.{i rl it rlrtrrltl l,Ift, (1)n11'l,r(,ss o{ tlrc ag of tlw 'r. lh,tl lor,. rtlutr Itt 'rrl'tttillti uu trpplication jn ialtntnry

¶44

'[ittlr ttl ,rtrriu, lltt llot'blr Srrpretnt Court ht,ld tlnt llrc lnte of b;rt, of tn trtt1tlrt1111, crrrtrrot b! nltr:rul at the 1ag. :n,l ol the stn'ict lltc ;tirl ttb;tntrti<ttr optfttlt's urlS ottly^,rl,tti,tst tlrc rtl?t)rl ls tturtlt br1 tltt ruylttrlr,t's, lnl nlso thttse ur rh by the L'tttltlot trl .

¶45

'I ltt'trlt) r, lltr u'ttl lrlrlto,t r' ullLttttL'rl, n5 ll,V(,tl ,fur ttttl tlrc rtsl)()llr ',1's t,rt rltti'Llrtl !t, anitlni lt llt lrt,ttltt) (! till lrc nttnttt: tlrc

¶46

¶47

¶48

tgt: of su[tl'm lttattot ncconlirg to tlra nga urculionad in thc yntiL.z n'.Itnls or ttt t,xltnd thc bcttcft of V.R.S. to lin, in occordrurce ruitlt tht rL,fur,trrtt Cinttlu. 71t rcsp()ttdctts slnll pny lnry to ttu ltt,littontr,^{jtrtlrc periorl, duritg tuhich} lu^{runs prettentttl} t'ronr ttttctrltng tfu tmrk. ffu ra slmll he ntt onlcr ls to costs."

¶49

The ratio lai<I dowu by this Court in the above referrecl to juclgment applics to the present case.

¶50

Having regard to the above, the date of birth of thc petitioncr slra [ [ Lre trea ted as' 30.06.1949' instead of ' 04.02.7948' .

¶51

11 l herefore, the writ petition is allowed, as prayed for As the petitioner has already attained the age of superannuation, tl-rc responLlents shall pay tlre salary to the petitioner for the 1rc'riod betrvcerr 28.02.2006 arrd 30.06.2007. The respondents shall also pav thc conscqu('l1tial scrvice benefits, if any, that may accru(, t() thc f.rs1i11611.,-

¶52

Nliscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stantl

¶53

closecl. rcrc sh.rll bc no order as to costs.

¶54

\ That Rule Nisi has been made absolute "" "bor".

¶55

Witness the Hon'ble the Chief Justice UJJAL BHUYAN, on this Tuesday, the Eleventh day of April, Two Thousand and Twenty Three.

¶56

SD/.T.JAYASREE ASSISTANHGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTIOR OFFICER

¶57

To,

¶58

1 The_Managrng Drrector, Telangana State Road Transport Corporahon RTC X Roads fi,ilusheerabad. Hvderabad.

¶59

2 The Works Manager Zonal workshops, TSRTC, Karimnaoar 3 One CC to SRI K VASUDEVA REDDY Advocate toPUCJ 4 ONC CC tO SRI GADDAM SRINIVAS (SC FOR TSi?TC) IOPUC] Two CD Copres

¶60