Smt. Savitri Devi vs State Of U.P. & Others
2014 Latest Caselaw 7300 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 31
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 58394 of 2009
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Savitri Devi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Srivastava,Alka Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J.

By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has come to this Court against the order of his retirement dated 24.9.2009. The petitioner was treated as retired on 24.9.2008 by order dated 24.9.2009. The said order was passed holding that due to cutting and over writing in service book, the petitioner has decreased his age. In fact, his date of birth treating him to be 46 years of age at the time of appointment would be 1948, but whereas in the service book, the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned as 8.3.1954 which is over writing. As such the petitioner stood retired in 2008 itself. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition and this Court vide its order dated 11.11.2009 by calling counter affidavit granted an interim order in favour of the petitioner and on the strength of the aforesaid order, the petitioner has continued till 8.3.2014. From the affidavit, it appears that at the time of appointment although the petitioner declared his age to be 34 years but the Chief Medical Officer's  by his report has assessed his age as 40 years.

Learned standing counsel on the basis of the counter affidavit states that the said report of the CMO also suggests 46 years of age and not 40 years, but bare reading of Annexure-3 to the writ petition does appear that the Chief Medical Officer has recorded the age of the petitioner according to his appearance as 40 years. From the service record in number and words, the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned to be 8.3.1954. Treating the date of birth of the petitioner to be 8.3.1954, the petitioner has completed the age of superannuation of 60 years on 8.3.2014.

It is not disputed that the petitioner has not been paid any salary etc after 8.3.2014. In my view the date of birth mentioned in the service record cannot be altered and changed at the fag end of the carrear and treating the petitioner's age tobe 8.3.1954, the petitioner stood retired from service on 7.3.2014. 

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the direction that in case there is  no other legal impediment in as much as no disciplinary proceeding is pending against the petitioner, the petitioner be treated to have retired from service on 7.3.2014 and would be entitled to pension and other benefits as admissible in law.

Order Date :- 8.10.2014

SKS