Research › Browse › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

1990 DIGILAW 50 (KER)

Prabhakaran Nair v. State of Kerala

1990-01-31

V.SIVARAMAN NAIR

body1990
Judgment :- 1. The date of birth in the service book of the petitioner was 10-1-1110 M.E. That date was copied from his S.S.L.C. Book. He claims that his actual date of birth is 10-1-1111 M.E., corresponding to 12-12-1935. He had sought correction of the date of birth in the service book pursuant to Ext.P16 Government Order dated 3-11-1975. The District Medical Officer of Health, Ernakulam, in Ext.P2 letter dated 3-4-1976 informed the petitioner that his request for correction of the date of birth in the service book would not be considered unless he obtained necessary correction in the school records. After collecting necessary certificates and other documents, he applied for correction of the date of birth in the school records. Since there was delay in filing the application, Government condoned the delay in filing the application under R.3 of Chapter VI of the Kerala Education Rules in Ext.P3 order dated 5-4-1986. 2. Petitioner thereupon submitted an application for correction of the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. Book to the Commissioner for Government Examinations, through the Headmaster of the Valayanchirangara High School on 21-7-1986. That was forwarded along with Ext.P4 dated 22-7-1986. He sent a reminder on 20-2-1987. In Ext.P5 dated 3-3-1987, petitioner was informed that correction of the date of birth in the school records and Secondary School Leaving Certificate was being examined and final orders would be issued in due course. Since there was no reply for a long time, petitioner submitted Ext.P6 application dated 20-11-1987 to the Secretary to Government requesting for correction of the date of birth, in view of the fact that according to the entries in the service records he was due to retire on 25-12-1989 and that the application for correction of the date of birth was to be submitted beyond two years of retirement. He stated specifically, that the S.S.L.C. Book has been forwarded to the Commissioner of Government Examinations and the same will be submitted when it is obtained from the Commissioner of Examinations. All the original certificates have been forwarded to the Commissioner for Government Examinations. He enclosed along with that letter a copy of Ext.P1 birth certificate and a copy of Ext.P5 letter. In Ext.P7 dated 25-11-1987, that request was forwarded to the Government. All the original certificates have been forwarded to the Commissioner for Government Examinations. He enclosed along with that letter a copy of Ext.P1 birth certificate and a copy of Ext.P5 letter. In Ext.P7 dated 25-11-1987, that request was forwarded to the Government. The Commissioner for Government Examinations passed Ext.P8 order dated 6-2-1988, correcting the date of birth of the petitioner from 10-5-1110 to 26-4-1111 M.E. Petitioner forwarded a copy of Ext.P8 order to the Government in his representation dated 4-3-1988, which was forwarded to the Government in Ext.P9. In Ext. P10 dated 30-6-1988, his controlling officer forwarded the corrected S.S.L.C. Book and Service Book to the Director of Health Services. In Ext.P14 dated 20-10-1988, with specific reference to the petitioner's application dated 14-12-1987, Government informed the petitioner that the question of correction of date of birth in the Service Book of the incumbent can be considered only after getting the date of birth corrected in his S.S.L.C. Book by the Commissioner for Government Examinations. Petitioner was requested to get the entry in the S.S.L.C. Book corrected first and then to approach the Government for correction in Service records. Ext.P15 is an application dated 14-12-1987, which was referred to in Ext.P14. It was thereafter that the Government passed Ext. P11 Order dated 21-11-1989 rejecting the request of the petitioner for correction of date of birth in the Service Book. The reasons stated were, that the application ought to have been filed before two years from the date of retirement as per the entries in the service book, and that the application should have been accompanied by S.S.L.C. Book after correcting the date of birth therein. It was also stated that the petitioner was due to retire On 25-11-1989 and that the application was submitted only on 15-11-1988. 3. Petitioner submits that Ext. P11 order is illegal since all the assumptions which are made therein are incorrect. He relies on Ext.P13 judgment in O.P.No.8041 of 1989 in which this court directed, in almost identical circumstances, that the request for correction of the date of birth in the service records should be considered if the application was filed beyond the period of two years; but, the correction of the date of birth in the S.S.L.C. Book was obtained only within the two years' period during the pendency of the application. 4. 4. I have mentioned in detail the chronology of events involved in this Original Petition only to show that the petitioner had filed his application for correction of the date of birth before the Government at least on 20-11-1987. That is clear from Ext.P6. He had stated therein that he was attaining the age of superannuation on 25-12-1989. It is true that the petitioner had not forwarded the corrected copy of the S.S.L.C. Book along with the application. It is evident from Ext.P6, that he had applied to the Commissioner for Government Examinations for correction of the date of birth on 21-7-1986. The order was passed only on 6-2-1988 and the petitioner could obtain a copy of the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected only by 30-6-1988. The delay on the part of the Government in passing orders on the application submitted on 21-7-1986 cannot be mentioned as a reason for rejecting the application, which was duly filed beyond the period of two years of the date of retirement according to the entries in the service book. I am satisfied that the petitioner had done all that he could to expedite the consideration of his application. In Ext.P5 dated 3-3-1987, in reply to the petitioner's letter dated 20-2-1987, the Commissioner for Government Examinations informed the petitioner that the question of correction of the date of birth in school records and S.S.L.C. Book was being examined and final orders would be issued in due course. It was thereafter that the petitioner filed Ext.P6 on 20-11-1987 before the State Government for correction of the date of birth in the service records assuring the Government that he will produce the S.S.L.C. Book soon-after obtaining. the same from the Commissioner for Government Examinations. On 14-12-1987, he had sent Ext. P15 representation informing the Government that his date of birth is 25-12-1935 and therefore orders on his application, Ext.P6 dated 20-11-1987 might be expedited. In Ext.P14 dated 21-10-1988, petitioner was informed that his request for correction of the date of birth in the service records will be considered only on receipt of the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected. If Ext.P6 application dated 20-11-1987 was not accompanied by the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected, it should have been rejected forthwith. Ext.P14 indicates that the Government also proceeded on the basis that the only requirement for passing orders on Ext.P6 was the production of the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected. If Ext.P6 application dated 20-11-1987 was not accompanied by the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected, it should have been rejected forthwith. Ext.P14 indicates that the Government also proceeded on the basis that the only requirement for passing orders on Ext.P6 was the production of the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected. There is no dispute that he had forwarded S.S.L.C. Book along with Ext.P10 to the Director of Health Services for onward transmission to the State Government. 5. These facts make it abundantly clear that the petitioner had submitted his application for correction of the date of birth in the service book beyond the period of two years of his retirement as per the entries in the service book. It is also evident that the Government was willing to consider his application for correction of the date of birth on the basis of Ext.P6 on production of the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected. It is not the case of the Government that only such applications as were made along with the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected would be entertained. I do not find any justifiable reason for the change of attitude as indicated in Ext. P11 order. Apart from this, it appears to me, that the petitioner is right in his submission that the Government proceeded to reject the request for correction of the date of birth on the assumption that the petitioner was due to retire on 25-11-1989 and his application for correction in the service book was filed only on 15-11-1988. This assumption is factually incorrect. I do not find anything in the relevant Government Orders, which justifies the stand now taken by the Government in Ext. P11, that the application for correction of the date of birth submitted more than two years prior to the date of retirement would not be entertained unless it is accompanied by the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected. If that be so, Government is bound to consider Ext.P6 supplemented by Exts.P9 and P10 as sufficient compliance with the requirement of producing the S.S.L.C. Book as corrected for enabling the Government to pass orders on the application for correction of the date of birth in the service book. 6. In this view, I allow this Original Petition and set aside Ext. P11 order. Petitioner has retired from service on 31-12-1989 according to the original entry in the service book. 6. In this view, I allow this Original Petition and set aside Ext. P11 order. Petitioner has retired from service on 31-12-1989 according to the original entry in the service book. He attains the age of 55 years according to the date of birth as corrected in the S.S.L.C. Book only on 11-12-1990 and has to retire from service only on 31-12-1990. Government shall consider his requestor correction of the date of birth and pass final orders within a period not exceeding a month from today. In view of the fact that the petitioner attains the age of retirement only on 11-12-1990, there will be a further direction that he shall be reinstated in service forthwith and shall be treated as continuing in service without break on his premature retirement on 31-12-1989. Parties will suffer their respective costs.