Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
R.Ramaiah, Krishna Dist. vs State Of A.P.School Edun Hyd 2 Others on 6 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
*HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
+WRIT PETITION No.15545 OF 2011
% 06.11.2024
#Between:
R.Ramaiah, S/o.late Pullaia, aged 44 years, Occ: Secondary Grade
Teacher, R/o.No.18-260, Shanthinagar, Tiruvur (Post) & Mandal,
Krishna District.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by Chief Secretary to the
Government of Andhra Pradesh (School Education
Department), Hyderabad - 500 022.
2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary for
School Education, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad - 500 022.
3. The Director of School Education, Saifabad, Hyderabad.
...Respondents
! Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms.P.Hemalalitha Kumari
^Counsel for the Respondents : Learned GP for School Education
<Gist :
> Head Note:
? Cases referred :
1. 1994 Supp (1) SCC 155
2. (2021) 12 SCC 27
3. WP.No.26262 of 2012 of High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad,
decided on 30.01.2024
This Court made the following:
//2// HN, J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
*HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
+WRIT PETITION No.15545 OF 2011
#Between:
R.Ramaiah, S/o.late Pullaia, aged 44 years, Occ: Secondary Grade
Teacher, R/o.No.18-260, Shanthinagar, Tiruvur (Post) & Mandal,
Krishna District.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by Chief Secretary to the
Government of Andhra Pradesh (School Education
Department), Hyderabad - 500022
2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary for
School Education, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad - 500 022.
3. The Director of School Education, Saifabad, Hyderabad.
...Respondents
DATE OF ORDER PRONOUNCED: 06.11.2024
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may
be allowed to see the Judgments? Yes/No
2. Whether the copies of order may be marked
to Law Reporters/Journals? Yes/No
3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see the fair
copy of the order?
Yes/No
____________________
JUSTICE HARINATH.N
//3// HN, J
APHC010235752011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3457]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION No.15545 of 2011
Between:
R.Ramaiah ...Petitioner
AND
State of A.P.School Education, ...Respondents
Hyderabad and 2 Others
Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms.P.Hemalalitha Kumari
Counsel for the Respondents : Learned GP for School Education
The Court made the following Order :
The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to rectify
the date of birth of the petitioner in the service records as
03.03.1969 instead of 01.07.1967.
2. The petitioner was selected as Secondary Grade Teacher in the
year 1998 and he joined as an Apprentice Teacher in
Gollagudem Primary School in Tiruvuru Mandal of Krishna
District. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that soon after joining service the petitioner informed the Mandal
//4// HN, J
Educational Officer that the age of the petitioner was wrongly
entered in the Service Record and that the petitioner was born
on 03.03.1969 as is mentioned in the S.S.C. Certificate.
3. It is further submitted that the petitioner was informed by the
Mandal Educational Officer that the date of birth correction can
be done only after completion of apprentice period. It is further
submitted that after completion of apprentice, the petitioner
approached the Mandal Educational Officer seeking correction of
date of birth. The petitioner made a representation on
12.08.2010 seeking change of date of birth, however, there was
no rectification of the service record as requested by the
petitioner. It is also submitted that, the petitioner intended to
apply for Group - I Examinations and other competitive
examinations. However, inaction on part of the respondents in
altering the date of birth as desired by the petitioner has denied
the petitioner opportunity to appear for competitive examinations.
4. It is submitted that, GOMs.No.165, Finance and Planning
(Fin.Wing-F.R.I) Department, dated 21.04.1984 contemplates the
procedure to be adopted for effecting rectification of date of birth
in Service Records. However, the process was not followed by
the respondents.
//5// HN, J
5. The learned Government Pleader for School Education, submits
that the petitioner having joined the service in the year 1998 has
come up for the first time on 12.08.2010 with a request to rectify
his date of birth in the Service Record. The inordinate delay on
part of the petitioner in approaching the respondent authorities
seeking rectification of his date of birth is unexplained. The
petitioner approached the respondent after 12 years of service. It
is submitted that, no employee can claim that their date of birth
was erroneously recorded in service after lapse of more than 10
years.
6. The learned Government Pleader placed reliance on the
following judgments Secretary and Commissioner, Home
Department and Others Vs. R.Kirubakaran1, Karnataka Rural
Infra Structure Development Limited Vs. T.P.Nataraja and
others2, and in the matter of Sanyasi Rao Vs. The High Court
of Andhra Pradesh3.
7. The petitioner has filed a copy of Birth Certificate issued on
13.08.1994, the same is issued by Mandal Revenue Officer,
Chandarlapadu Mandal, Krishna District. The learned counsel for
the petitioner also places reliance on GOMs.No.165, Finance
1 1994 Supp (1) SCC 155
(2021) 12 SCC 27
WP.No.26262 of 2012 of High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad, decided on 30.01.2024
//6// HN, J
and Planning (Fin.Wing-F.R.I) Department, dated 21.04.1984,
whereby, the Government prescribed the procedure for
Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth.
8. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned
Government Pleader for School Education and perused the
material available on record.
9. As seen from the representation of the petitioner dated
12.08.2010, the petitioner has approached the respondent
authorities for the first time in writing after a period of 12 years of
service. In the representation, the petitioner has also narrated
the academic achievements and also the problems he faced on
his personal front. In the same representation, the petitioner has
stated that in the year 2010, he could withstand and come out of
problems and as such has focused on seeking rectification of his
date of birth as recorded in service register.
10. In the matter of Secretary and Commissioner, Home
Department and Others Vs. R.Kirubakaran (supra1), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that when the issue of correcting
the date of birth of the public servant is concerned, it has chain
reaction, in as much as others waiting for years, below him for
their respective promotions are affected in the process. As such,
correction of date of birth entry cannot be done in a casual
//7// HN, J
manner. In the matter of Karnataka Rural Infra Structure
Development Limited Vs. T.P.Nataraja and others (supra2),
the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the effect of delay and
latches when seeking correction of date of birth is adverse to the
claim of the petitioner, as the employee was found not entitled to
seek correction of date of birth after an unexplained delay.
11. The Division Bench of Telangana High Court in the matter of
Sanyasi Rao Vs. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh (supra3)
has also considered the similar issue where an employee sought
a rectification of his date of birth. The Division Bench has
considered the issue and held that the rules framed by the State
Government would not permit for alteration of date of birth on the
basis of any judgment of decree of Court.
12. The State has passed the following Rules for the benefit of its
staff where rectification of service record is necessitated on
account of clerical errors and in this regard the Andhra Pradesh
Public Employment (Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth)
Rules, 1984 (for short, 'the Rules, 1984') were framed. The
applicable rules are as follows :
2. Recording of date of birth : - (1) Every Government
employee shall, within one month from the date on which
he joins duty, make a declaration as to his date of birth.
(2) On receipt of the declaration made under sub-rule (1),
the Head of Office or any other officer who maintains the
//8// HN, J
service record in respect of such Government employee
shall, after making such enquiry as may be deemed fit,
with regard to the declaration and after taking into
consideration such evidence, if any, as may be adduced
in respect of the said declaration, make an order within
four months from the date on which the Government
employee joins service determining the date of birth :
Provided that in cases where the date of birth as
determined under this sub-rule is different from the one
declared by the Government employee concerned under
sub-rule (1), he shall be given an opportunity of making a
representation, before a final order is made.
(3) Where a Government employee fails to make a
declaration within the time specified in sub-rule (1), the
Head of Office or the officer who maintains the service
records shall, after taking into consideration such
evidence as may be available and after giving an
opportunity of making a representation to the
Government employee concerned, determine the date of
birth of the employee within six months from the date on
which the Government employee joins service.
(4) The date of birth determined under this rule shall be
entered in the service records of the employee concerned
duly attested by the Head of the Office or the officer who
maintains the service records and the date of birth so
entered, shall be final and binding and the Government
employees shall be stopped from disputing the
correctness of such date of birth.
[(5) The date of birth as determined on the basis of the
school records or any proof produced at the time of
entering into service and entered in the service record
shall be final and no subsequent variation of date of birth
in the school records for any reason, shall be relevant for
the purpose of service and on that basis the date of birth
entered in the service records shall not be altered except
in the case of bonafide clerical error, under the orders of
the Government.] [Subs.by G.O.Ms.No. 94, Fin. & Plg.,
Dt. 15.03.94]
2A. "Civil Courts" Decree not to be taken into
consideration:- In any proceedings before the
//9// HN, J
Government or any Court, Tribunal or other authority for
the alteration of date of birth in the service records, the
decree of a Civil Court in regard to alteration of the date
of birth in the School or the University records or the
contents in the Judgment leading to such decree, or the
effect of its implementation shall not be taken into
consideration in derogation to these rules and it is hereby
declared that these rules shall have effect
notwithstanding anything contained in any Judgment
decree or order of a Civil Court in regard to the alteration
of date of birth in the School or the University records
whether or not the Government is a party - to such
proceedings.] [Added by G.O.Ms.No. 383, Fin. & Plg., Dt.
16.11.1993 w.e.f. 21.04.1984]
3. Procedure in recording date of birth of employees
appointed before the commencement of these rules: -
The date of birth of a Government employee who has
been appointed before the commencement of these rules
and whose service register has not been opened, shall be
recorded in the manner laid down in Rule 2.
4. Alteration of date of birth in past cases: - Rule 4 re-
numbered as sub-rule [(1)] No Government employee in
service, before the commencement of these rules;
(a) Whose date of birth has been recorded in the Service
Register in accordance with the rules applicable to him;
or
(b) Whose entry relating to date of birth became final and
binding under the rules in force prior to the
commencement of these rules, shall be entitled to claim
alteration of his date of birth.
[(2) No subsequent variation of the date of birth in the
school records shall be relevant for the purpose of
service nor shall such variation be a valid ground for
ordering an alteration of the date of birth by any Court.
Tribunal or other authority.] [Added by G.O.Ms.No. 94,
Fin. & Plg., Dt. 15.03.94]
5. Cases pending on the date of commencement of
these rules: - The cases in which the Government
employees have already applied for alteration of their
date of birth and which are pending on the date of
commencement of these rules, shall be dealt with on the
//10// HN, J
basis of recorded age in School and College records at
the time of entry into service.
6. Effect of the Rules: - No rule made or deemed to
have been made under the proviso to Article 309 of the
Constitution of India shall, in so far as it is inconsistent
with any of the provisions of these rules, shall have any
effect.
13. On the facts of this case, the petitioner's attempt to seek
rectification of his date of birth in the service record is made for
the first time on 12.08.2010. In the said representation, the
petitioner has admitted that, after joining service he underwent a
series of personal problems and that only in the year 2010 he
could withstand and stabilize himself. As such attempts to
substantiate his inordinate delay in seeking the rectification by
citing his personal problems in life.
14. In the considered opinion of this Court, no employee can seek
rectification of his date of birth in the service record as a matter
of fundamental right. The cascading effect of alteration in date of
birth of an employee is severe and impacts the service and
career of several others who are waiting after long and
unblemished service for their promotions or other service
benefits.
15. The attempt of the petitioner seeking rectification of his date of
birth in the service records in a casual manner cannot be
considered by the respondents in an equally casual manner. The
//11// HN, J
Hon'ble Supreme Court has rejected granting reliefs to the
employees seeking corrections in date of birth in service records
in a casual manner.
16. The case of the petitioner cannot be considered for grant of the
relief as the same is contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Public
Employment (Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth) Rules,
1984. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without costs.
Miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
___________________
JUSTICE HARINATH.N
Note : L.R. Copy to be marked
B/o.KGM
//12// HN, J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION No.15545 of 2011
Dated 06.11.2024
L.R. Copy
KGM
