Santosh vs Union Of India And Ors

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

The applicant joined the Indian Administrative Service on 10.07.1986 and was posted in the Department of Agriculture Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture. Her date of birth was recorded in the service register as 30.01.1958 on the basis of the entry in the matriculation certificate. Stating that the entry in the matriculation certificate itself was not correct and the date of birth as per the certificate of birth is 31.01.1960, the applicant submitted a representation on 22.01.1991 to the respondents with a request to the appointing authority to alter her date of birth in the service record.

At a time when the applicant was working in the Ministry of Defence as a Joint Secretary, that Ministry examined the case at length, and seems to have taken the view that the applicant is entitled for the relief, and referred the matter to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoP&T). Vide their note dated 24.05.2017, the DoP&T did not concur with the proposal. Taking the same into account, the Ministry of Defence informed the applicant through communication dated 08.06.2017 that the request for change of date of birth is not agreed to by the competent authority. The same is challenged in this OA.

The applicant relied upon the departmental guidelines that are applicable in the matters pertaining to requests for change of date of birth, and stated that she has complied with all the requirements. According to her, the rejection of her request is contrary to the relevant provisions of law.

On behalf of the respondents, a detailed counter affidavit is filed. The gist of their contention is that though the application for alteration of date of birth was made within five years from the date of entering into service, the undisputed material, which can constitute the basis for change of date of birth in the service record, did not exist at that time. To be precise, their contention is that the entry as to the date of birth in the matriculation certificate was altered only in the year 2006, and that being the matter, the application filed in 1991 cannot be said to be complete and proper.

Heard Shri Yogesh Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri Hanu Bhaskar, learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents.

The only question that arises for consideration in this OA is as to whether the applicant is entitled to the relief as to change of her date of birth, that was entered in the service record. A perusal of the detailed note that was prepared by the Ministry of Defence reveals that three conditions are to be fulfilled under Fundamental Rule 56 for this purpose, namely, (a) the request for change of date of birth must be made within five years of entry into Government service; (b) it must be clearly established that a bona fide mistake has occurred; and (c) in case the date of birth is altered as per the request, it should not make the candidate ineligible to appear in any school or university or UPSC examinations, wherein the candidate appeared for entry into the Government service. In other words, the candidate should not become underaged for the purpose of the relevant examinations, on account of the altered date of birth.

On a thorough analysis of the case of the applicant, the concerned department found that condition (a) is complied with, and the condition (c) would not be violated if the request for change of date of birth was acceded to. The whole controversy as to whether there existed unimpeachable material, to carry out the change of date of birth when the application was made. This is referable to condition (b) referred to above.

A perusal of the representation made by the applicant on 22.01.1991 discloses that she took the plea that her date of birth in the matriculation certificate itself was incorrect, and the same needs to be altered on the basis of the entry in the date of birth certificate. It hardly needs any mention that the basis for any employer to enter the date of birth of an employee is the entry in the matriculation certificate. Had it been a case where the date of birth which was entered in the service record of the applicant was at variance with the one, in the matriculation certificate, there would have existed proper justification and basis to straightway accept her request. That, however, is not the case here. Even in 1991, it was necessary to alter the date of birth in the matriculation certificate. In para 6 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the entry in the matriculation certificate was altered by the Punjab State Education Board only on 07.04.2006, and the same is filed as Annexure-V. This clinchingly establishes that there was no basis or foundation for making application in the year 1991, and if at all anything, such basis came into existence only in the year 2006. The applicant was not entitled to file application for change of date of birth in the year 2006, having regard to the time limit of five years stipulated for purposes of making such application. The applicant has attained the age of superannuation on 31.01.2018, and since her date of birth in the service record was not changed by that time, she is not entitled to continue in service beyond that date.

We do not find any merit in the OA. It is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.