JUDGMENT M. Katju, J.—This special appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 3.4.2002. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 3. The writ petitioner (respondent No. 1 in this special appeal) was appointed as chowkidar on 1.8.1965 in Sarvodaya Shiksha Sadan Inter College, Bheerpur, Allahabad which is a recognised aided institution. The initial date of birth of Dev Raj Tiwari was recorded in the service record as 1.1.1933 on his own statement in absence of his educational certificate. Subsequently it was found that the respondent No. 1 wilfully and deliberately made concealment of fact that he had taken education in Primary School, Khain, Karchana, Allahabad and his date of birth is recorded in school records as 12.6.1925. Thereafter the Principal of the Institution issued a notice to the respondent No. 1 on 16.7.1987 by registered post to show cause why his date of birth be not corrected in view of the school certificate. The Principal also sent a letter dated 3.8.1987 to respondent to file a medical certificate of the Chief Medical Officer, Allahabad in respect of his age. True copy of the letter dated 3.8.1987 is Annexure-1. 4. After giving opportunity of hearing to the respondent No. 1 the Principal of the Institution by his letter dated 28.8.1987, retired the respondent No. 1 after correcting his date of birth by order dated 18.8.1987 as 12.6.1925 in place of 1.1.1933. Against the aforesaid order dated 18.8.1987 of the Principal of the college by which the respondent No. 1 was retired on 30.6.1985, on the ground that his date of birth was 12.6.1925 the respondent No. 1 filed an appeal before the Committee of Management. Photocopy of the appeal of the respondent No. 1 is Annexure-2. This appeal was rejected by the Committee of Management and the order of the Principal dated 18.8.1987 was not challenged by the respondent No. 1 before the District Inspector of Schools or any other Court or authority and hence the aforesaid order dated 28.8.1987 passed by the Principal of the college retiring the respondent No. 1 from service on 30.6.1985 on the ground that he was born on 12.6.1925 became final and binding. 5. 5. Consequently by order dated 23.9.1996, the Joint Director of Education, Allahabad has fixed the pension of respondent No. 1 treating his date of retirement as 30.6.1985 and the Joint Director has also passed an order dated 9.4.1986 in respect of payment of Provident Fund to respondent No. 1 treating his date of retirement as 30.6.1985. True copy of the orders dated 23.9.1996 and 9.4.1996 are Annexure-3 to the writ petition. 6. It may be mentioned that the respondent No. 1 was suspended by the Principal of the College on 15.4.1980 and thereafter he was dismissed on 30.6.1980. He filed a civil suit challenging his dismissal order and the suit was decreed by the judgment dated 7.8.1985. Against that judgment an appeal was filed by the Committee of Management before the District Judge, Allahabad which was dismissed on 11.3.1987. Thereafter Second Appeal No. 2269 of 1987 was filed by the Committee of Management and the same was also dismissed by the High Court on 6.11.1992. 7. The learned single Judge by the impugned judgment has directed that the writ petitioner be paid salary from 15.4.1980 to 31.1.1993 although the petitioner has retired on 30.6.1985 as stated in the order of the Principal of the college dated 18.8.1987 which had become final as already stated above. Hence, we are of the opinion that the learned single Judge was not justified in directing that the writ petitioner be paid salary till 31.1.1993. 8. The learned single Judge in paragraph 5 of the impugned judgment has observed that the date of birth which was entered in the service book of the petitioner as 1.1.1933 was not changed to 12.6.1925 in accordance with law or with any Government order or by the competent authority. In our opinion this view is not correct. As already stated above, the date of birth of the petitioner was changed to 12.6.1925 by the order of the Principal of the college dated 28.8.1987. This was done because initially the date of birth of the writ petitioner was recorded in the service book on his own statement in absence of any educational certificate. As already stated above, the date of birth of the petitioner was changed to 12.6.1925 by the order of the Principal of the college dated 28.8.1987. This was done because initially the date of birth of the writ petitioner was recorded in the service book on his own statement in absence of any educational certificate. Thereafter when it was learnt that he had made wilful and deliberate concealment of fact and that his date of birth recorded in the school record of Primary School Khain, Karchana, Allahabad was 12.6.1925, the Principal of the college after issuing show cause notice to the petitioner corrected his date of birth by his order dated 28.8.1987. Against that order the appeal of the petitioner was rejected by the Committee of Management. That order was not challenged. Hence, the order of the Principal of the college dated 28.8.1987 became final. Hence, the controversy about the date of birth should not have been permitted to be raised at a subsequent stage. The view taken by the learned single Judge in paragraph 5 of the judgment is therefore incorrect and is set aside. 9. As regards paragraph 6 of the impugned judgment a modification is made therein by substituting the words “from 15.4.1980 to 31.1.1993” by the words “from 15.4.1980 to 30.6.1985”. 10. In view of the above the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment is modified in accordance with the observations made above.