JUDGMENT 1. - Petitioner was recruited on the post of Constable on 30.6.1971. It was after more than 29 years of satisfactory service that the petitioner was issued a charge sheet on 29.12.2000, alleging that at the time of recruitment the petitioner has submitted a false certificate in regard to qualification and date of birth. After holding an enquiry, the services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 10.4.2001. All medals and appreciation certificates were also cancelled as per the termination order itself. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated 7.7.2001. Hence, the present writ petition. 2. The dispute is only in regard to two certificates available on record; one having date of birth as 12.6.1952 and educational qualification as 8th pass, whereas, other indicated the date of birth as 15.6.1952 and educational qualification as 7th pass. The certificates had been submitted at the very initial stage after the petitioner joined the services in the year 1971. Admittedly, as per the disciplinary authority also, the petitioner has not taken any benefit out of these certificates. At the time of recruitment, apart from having requisite qualifications, the petitioner was also within the age limit. Petitioner has also explained the circumstances under which two certificates might have been placed on record. Since the service record has been verified from time to time there is a legal presumption that the educational qualifications and date of birth have been entered in the service record after due verification by the concerning authorities. There is also no dispute that the petitioner has an outstanding service record throughout the tenure i.e. from the date of appointment till the date of termination and has also been awarded appreciation certificates and medals for the services rendered by him. 3. Respondents, in their reply, has relied on an office memorandum issued on 19.5.1993 under which the disciplinary action alleged to have been taken against the petitioner. A bare reading of the office memorandum would show that the same is not at all applicable in the fact and circumstances of the present case. The office memorandum is only in regard to the persons against whom action could be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqualified for their initial recruitment. A bare reading of the office memorandum would show that the same is not at all applicable in the fact and circumstances of the present case. The office memorandum is only in regard to the persons against whom action could be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqualified for their initial recruitment. The petitioner has also submitted a copy of the letter written by the head-master of the school concerned on 22.7.2000 to the Addl. DIG, CRPF, Palipuram (Kerala) - respondent No.5, informing the above authority in regard to the date of birth of the petitioner as entered in school record. 4. Having considered entire facts and circumstances, since the petitioner was having requisite qualifications and was also within age limit at the time of his recruitment, considering his outstanding service record and further, admittedly, the petitioner not having received any benefit on the basis of certificates available on service record, penalty of in the present case cannot be justified in any manner. The concerning authorities appear to have proceeded just in a mechanical way without any proper application of mind. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 10.4.2001, dismissing the services of the petitioner, is quashed and set aside. Petitioner is held entitled for all consequential benefits. Certificates of appreciation and medals awarded to the petitioner shall also be restored to him consequently.Writ petition allowed. *******