Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1800 (ALL)

DARBARI LAL v. STATE OF U. P.

2003-08-11

RAKESH TIWARI

body2003
RAKESH TIWARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record. ( 2 ) THE petitioner was employed as Jamadar in 1976 in the office of Executive Officer, Nagar palika Parishad, Bisauli, district Badaun. His date of birth recorded in the service book was 1. 7. 1939, Vide letter dated 22. 9. 1997 the petitioner was informed that there is no record of his age/date of birth available in his personal file. By this letter, the petitioner was directed to submit proof of his age. ( 3 ) IT is submitted by the petitioner that on receipt of the letter dated 22. 9. 1997, he filed an application along with School Leaving Certificate bearing the signature of District Basic education Officer, dated 9. 12. 1992 and also of the Principal dated 16. 7. 1992. ( 4 ) HE was thereafter informed vide order dated 8. 4. 1999 that he would retire on 30. 9. 1999 on attaining the age of superannuation which is Impugned in this petition on the ground that it is mala fide and is based on no evidence. ( 5 ) IT is submitted that no reason has been given or communicated to the petitioner for discarding the date of birth given in the school leaving certificate as 15. 10. 1950. It is submitted that the petitioner will superannuate on 15. 10. 2010 according to the date given in the school leaving certificate and he has still more about 11 years of service left. ( 6 ) COUNSEL for the respondent submits that the petitioner had concealed the material facts from this Court that he approached the District Commissioner, Bareilly, against the notice/order of retirement dated 8. 4. 1997 and his representation is pending before the Commissioner. It is further submitted that the representation has been filed during the pendency of the writ petition of the petitioner before Divisional Commissioner. In paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit, it has been stated that a notice dated 18. 11. 1991 annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition had also been issued to the petitioner earlier to submit clarification/proof of date of birth and as no proof of date of birth was submitted by him, an entry was made in the service book on 12. 8. 1991 recording his date of birth as 1. 7. 1939. On the basis of declaration made by the petitioner on 1. 8. 1991 recording his date of birth as 1. 7. 1939. On the basis of declaration made by the petitioner on 1. 12. 1976, the order retiring him does not suffer from any illegality as no reliance can be placed on school leaving certificate as it is not an irrecorrigible proof of age. ( 7 ) HE lastly submits that the entry in the service book can only be the reliable proof of date of birth as it is based on the declaration of the petitioner. ( 8 ) NO rejoinder-affidavit has been filed rebutting the averments made in the counter-affidavit. ( 9 ) IT is settled law that law that the date of birth recorded in the service book should be taken as reliable proof of age. The authorities had not relied upon the date of birth given in the transfer certificate submitted by the petitioner as it is not an irrecorrigible proof of age. ( 10 ) DURING the course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner had stated that the petitioner had appeared in the High School Examination but failed and was, therefore, not awarded certificate from the Board of High School and Intermediate Examination showing his date of birth. It may be said that certificate showing the date of birth was not awarded to the petitioner because he failed in the examination but at the time he filled his High School Form, he must have given his date of birth which is mandatory and was not prevented from submitting the date of birth as given by him in the High School Examination even though he failed in the examination. ( 11 ) IN 2000 (2) Selected Allahabad Cases 80, a Division Bench of this Court has held that if a person has appeared in High School Examination, the date of birth in school leaving certificate cannot be considered to be authentic proof of age. He has not filed any document showing his date of birth recorded in the High School Examination. And in this view of the matter too, the photo copy of the duplicate copy of school leaving certificate issued on 19. 10. 1992 annexed with the writ petition cannot be relied upon. The entries regarding the date of birth of the petitioner in the school leaving certificate show overwriting and original has not been placed before the court. And in this view of the matter too, the photo copy of the duplicate copy of school leaving certificate issued on 19. 10. 1992 annexed with the writ petition cannot be relied upon. The entries regarding the date of birth of the petitioner in the school leaving certificate show overwriting and original has not been placed before the court. Therefore, the document is not an irrecorrigible proof of age and has rightly been discarded by the authorities. ( 12 ) FOR the reasons stated above, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs. .