ORDER : Vikram Nath, J. 1. We have heard Shri R.G. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri D.M. Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State respondents. 2. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking correction of his date of birth from 01.01.1962 to 15.01.1964 on the finding that firstly in the High School Certificate the date of birth of the petitioner-appellant was recorded as 01.01.1962, further in 2005, the department had required all the teachers and other staff to check their High School Certificates regarding their date of birth and submit their affidavit whether the date of birth is correct or not. In response to that, the present appellant had tendered the affidavit accepting his date of birth so recorded in the High School Certificate to be correct. In this respect, the State respondents had filed their affidavit in reply and had taken a specific plea to which there was no denial. 3. The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant is to the effect that as the appellant had obtained a decree from the Magistrate Court regarding declaration of his date of birth as 15.01.1964, as such, the same should be treated to be correct date of birth and accordingly incorporated. We are not convinced with the said submission inasmuch as the State was not party in those proceedings nor the Director of Education or other State authorities were made parties, only Talati of the area and the Principal of the Institution were made parties. Therefore, the said decree would not be binding on the State. The appellant who is a teacher, took 19 to 20 years after joining the school to realize that the date of birth was incorrect. That itself indicates that the proceedings before the Magistrate Court were not bona fide. 4. For all the reasons recorded above, we do not find any error in the order of the learned Single Judge. The appeal is dismissed accordingly. Since the main appeal is dismissed, the connected Civil Application stands disposed of.