This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying the following reliefs : (i) To quash the order dated 10.4.95 Annexure XII. (ii) To direct the respondents to grant the leave applied for by the petitioner for the entire period. The order dated 10.4.95 is quoted below : "With reference to the subject above and letter mentioned I am to inform you that after proper verification of the records of your date of pension by the Director, AH & Vety. Deptt, Assam and he had agreed the date of pension of your if 31.12.93. So you are requested to hand over your all officials articles records etc to the ARO, OIU I/C Poly Clinic on or before 12.4.95 to proceed a pension. You are also requested to submit you pension papers to the undersigned immediately for taking necessary action from this end. This is for favour information and necessary action." 2. According to the petitioner, his date of retirement is 31.12.96. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows. 4. On 9.10.57 the petitioner was appointed and joined as Veterinary Field Assistant in the Department of Veterinary, Govt. of Assam. On 30.3.92 the petitioner made a representation before the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, respondent No.2 requesting him to accept 21.12.1938 as his date of birth and to allow him to continue in his service till he attains the superannuation on 21.12.96. The letter was forwarded to the Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Veterinary Department to the Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department requesting him to take necessary steps for correcting the age of the petitioner with a intimation to the department urgently as the matter is badly delayed. That is Annexure II to the writ application. That is quoted below : xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 5. This letter was forwarded by the Deputy Secretary Govt. of Assam Veterinary Department to Director of Animal Husbandry requesting him to take necessary steps for correcting the age of the petitioner. On 31.3.93 vide Annexure IV to the writ application, a letter was written which quoted below: xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 6. So, the department found that the date of birth of the petitioner is 21.12.3 8. of Assam Veterinary Department to Director of Animal Husbandry requesting him to take necessary steps for correcting the age of the petitioner. On 31.3.93 vide Annexure IV to the writ application, a letter was written which quoted below: xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 6. So, the department found that the date of birth of the petitioner is 21.12.3 8. On 18.6.93 the Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department allowed him to avail the LTC and in the said order it was specifically stated that the petitioner shall retire from service on 31.12.96. That is Annexure V to the writ application and that is quoted below : 7. Thereafter vide Annexure VII it was stated that the petitioner would retire on 31.12.96 and his date of birth is 21.12.38. On 2nd July, 1994 also an order was passed vide Annexure VII wherein the date of birth of the petitioner was accepted as 21.12.38 and he was to retire on 21.12.96 (31.12.96). That order is quoted below : xxxx  xxxxx xxxx The petitioner underwent some fracture and he was admitted to hospital and he was treated in the hospital and he was granted commuted leave vide Annexure IX on 5th October, 1994. That is quoted below : "Commuted leave granted to Sri tyarayan Chandra Bora, Livestock Inspector, Chaygaon Block on medical ground for 63 days with effect from 27.8.94 to 27.10.94. He is likely to return to the same post from which he proceed on leave." 9. On 7.4.95 a letter was issued by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam to the respondent No.3, directing him to grant leave as admissible him fort with i.e. Annexure XI. That is quoted below : xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 10. Thereafter, the impugned letter Annexure XII was issued. Hence, this application with the prayer as indicated above. 11. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of respondent No.3 (Director) wherein it is stated that the original date of birth of the petitioner was recorded in the service as 21.12.35 and that was later on overwritten and made 21.12.38. DC Kamrup was asked to make an enquiry and he made an enquiry and after the enquiry, it was accepted that his date of birth was 21.12.35 and not 21.12.38 and as such he was asked to go on retirement from 31.12.93. DC Kamrup was asked to make an enquiry and he made an enquiry and after the enquiry, it was accepted that his date of birth was 21.12.35 and not 21.12.38 and as such he was asked to go on retirement from 31.12.93. As the petitioner is to retire on 21.12.93, the question of granting leave to him does not arise. 12. I have heard Shri SN Medhi, learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents. The enquiry report is quoted below : xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 13. Alongwith this enquiry report a certificate from the school was also " annexed. That certificate is quoted below : xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 14. The enquiry report of the Forensic Department is quoted below : xxxx  xxxxx xxxx 15. So, from this enquiry report, it is not clear as to who made this over writing. It is not established that this overwriting was made by the petitioner. I had looked at the service book in original which was submitted before me. In the original it is seen to be 21.12.1938 (no doubt that some overwriting in the figure 8). Later on it was corrected as 21.12.35 and it has been stated that this was corrected as per report of the Scientific Officer, Questioned Documents Division, Forensic Science Laboratory. This is dated 1.6.86. Nothing has been said in this report. When this correction was made, the petitioner was not associated with the enquiry. The correction appeared to have been made behind the back of the petitioner. Thereafter on 30.3.93, the following endorsement was made : "This is to certify that the date of birth has been verify with supported satisfactory documentary evidence and duly attested copy of the certificate to gather satisfactory explanation and the date of birth is recorded as 21.12.38 and the date of retirement is 31.12.96." 16. After this endorsement was made, the widely accepted date of retirement of the petitioner is 31.12.96 and accordingly as indicated above, the department made all the correspondences. This endorsement dated 30.3,93 must be deemed to have wiped out the earlier endorsement made on 1.6.86. It is not understood as to how the authority thereafter without making any enquiry vide Annexure XII can ask the petitioner to go on retirement on 31.12.93. 17. This endorsement dated 30.3,93 must be deemed to have wiped out the earlier endorsement made on 1.6.86. It is not understood as to how the authority thereafter without making any enquiry vide Annexure XII can ask the petitioner to go on retirement on 31.12.93. 17. Accordingly, I find that this order at Annexure XII is absolutely without jurisdiction and the same is in violation of principle of natural justice, and accordingly the same is quashed. The petitioner shall go on retirement on 31.12.96 according to his service book which was accepted by the authority as will be seen from the materials quoted above. The petitioner shall be taken back in service and shall be allowed to continue till 31.12.96. The petitioner shall also be entitled to all back wages for the period for which he was out of service. The leave due to the petitioner shall also be sanctioned in accordance with the law and rule. 18. This writ application accordingly is allowed. I leave the parties to bear their own costs.