Allahabad High Court
Kashim Ali vs Union Of Inida Through General ... on 6 July, 2017
Bench: Sudhir Agarwal, Ravindra Nath Mishra-Ii
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. - 3
Case :- SERVICE BENCH No. - 1222 of 2014
Petitioner :- Kashim Ali
Respondent :- Union Of India Through General Manager Northern Railway
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Abid Ali
Counsel for Respondent :- Pankaj Srivastava
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Mishra-II,J.
1. Heard Sri Mohd. Abid Ali, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent.
2. The dispute relates to change of Date of Birth which was raised by petitioner before Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in Original Application No. 423 of 2011 stating that his correct date of birth was mentioned in service record as 20.10.1957 but it was tampered as 20.10.1951 and, therefore, necessary correction should be made so as to make it 20.10.1957 and allow petitioner to continue in service till date of retirement, accordingly. This original application has been dismissed by Tribunal vide judgment dated 06.05.2014 which has been challenged in this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that medical certificate and letter of appointment was issued in 1978 wherein containing date of birth as 20.10.1957 but number 7 has been manipulated by erasing and made 1. He further submitted that in several other documents his date of birth is mentioned as 20.10.1957 in this regard placed reliance on the following:-
(i) Pay slip issued by for the month of 01.07.2012, March,2007 and July, 2007.
(ii) Provident Fund Ledger (Provisional)
(iii) Identity card issued on 30.07.2008.
(iv) Loan account of Northern Railway Primary Co-operative Bank Ltd dated 11.11.2002.
4. We have considered the submission and perused record but find no substance.
5. The original initial documents issued by authorities concerned at the time of appointment, which have been filed as annexure- CA-1 and CA-2 to counter affidavit, clearly show date of birth of petitioner as 20.10.1951. Having gone through the same very carefully, we do not any manipulation or alteration. In fact, as per our view, date of birth has been mentioned in the documents very clearly and legibly. Annexure-CA-1 is a medical certificate for appointment issued by Railway Medical Examiner on 25.04.1978 which contains thumb impression of petitioner also and it mentions date of birth as 20.10.1951.
5. Similarly, annexure-CA-2 is an appointment order which was issued on 03.05.1978 by Assistant Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Lucknow and mentions petitioner's date of birth 20.10.1951. This document also contains signature of petitioner.
6. Admittedly petitioner joined as Khallasi in the year 1978. His leave account was also prepared in the prescribed form in which also his date of birth has mentioned as 20.10.1951 which has also been filed as annexure- CA-3.
6. Documents prepared by the authorities concerned at initial stage of appointment of petitioner do not admit any kind of doubt with regard to mention of date of birth as 20.10.1951 which has been mentioned very clearly and legibly. On other documents filed by petitioner which came into existence subsequently, if any error has crept that will not alter or change above date of birth for the purpose of retirement of petitioner. It has to be seen from the documents as were prepared at the time of appointment.
7. Even otherwise we are also of the view that allegations that 7 has been manipulated and made 1 is difficult to believe in as much as it requires erasing of upper part of the number which can be easily seen from record but documents annexure- CA-1 & CA-2 do not show any such kind of erasing, therefore, also allegations of manipulation in our view is not substantive.
8. We,therefore, find no error in the impugned judgment and order warranting interference.
9. Petition lacks merit. Dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.7.2017
Pachhere/-
