Subhash Sonaji Nivare vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 10941 Bom

                                     1                                     wp 8793.2021

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

               961 WRIT PETITION NO.8793 OF 2021

                 SUBHASH SONAJI NIVARE
                         VERSUS
          THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                          ...
   Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Shaikh Kayyum Najir
       AGP for Respondents/State: Mr. A. R. Kale
                          ...

                               CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                      R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

                               DATE:     12th AUGUST, 2021

 PER COURT:

1. The petitioner had filed Original Application

before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal

seeking correction of date of birth.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner

submits that the date of birth of the petitioner

is 04.01.1965. It is wrongly recorded in the

school record and the service record as

01.04.1963. The learned Counsel submits that in

the year-1997, the petitioner had applied to the

Collector for correction of date of birth,

however, he replied that the same cannot be done

by him. Thereafter, the petitioner in the

2 wp 8793.2021

year- 2018 applied to the department for

correction of the date of birth in the service

book. The same is not considered in correct

perspective by the employer. The learned Counsel

further submits that the Horoscope very clearly

suggests that the date of birth of the petitioner

is 04.01.1965. The petitioner has 2 elder brothers

and the date of birth of the eldest brother is

recorded as 01.01.1959 and the date of birth of

second eldest brother is recorded as 12.08.1962.

If the date of birth of the petitioner is

considered as 01.04.1963 the same would on the

face of it appears to be incorrect. The difference

would be only 8 months between the elder brother

of the petitioner and the petitioner. All these

aspects are not considered by the tribunal while

dismissing the Original Application.

3. The learned A.G.P. supports the Judgment of

the tribunal and submits that Rule 38 of the

Maharashtra Civil Services (General Conditions of

Service) Rules, 1981 permits the correction of the

date of birth in the service record within 5 years

3 wp 8793.2021

and that too if there is a mistake of a third

party in recording the date of birth in the

service record. The date of birth in the service

record was recorded on the basis of the

representation of the petitioner and his school

record.

4. We have considered the submissions canvassed

by the learned Counsel for the parties.

5. The petitioner joined services with the

respondent on 29.11.1993. The date of birth in the

service book was recorded as represented by the

petitioner and as per the documents produced by

the petitioner such as the school record. The date

of birth as claimed by the petitioner viz.

04.01.1965 is recorded by the Grampanchayat

purportedly under the Births and Deaths

Registration Act in the year-2018. No presumption

can be attached to the said date of birth

recorded. Reliance can be had to the Judgment of

the Division Bench of this Court in case of

Gangadhar Gonduram Tadme Vs. Trimbak Govindrao

4 wp 8793.2021

Akingire and others reported in 2005 (1) Mh.L.J.

94.

6. Moreover, considering Rule 38 of the

Maharashtra Civil Services (General Conditions of

Service) Rules, 1981 the correction cannot be

considered at the fag end of the service. The

petitioner had moved for correction at the fag end

of his service career. The same is also not

permissible. No authenticate document is placed on

record. The tribunal has rightly considered the

said aspect. No interference called for.

7. Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

[R. N. LADDHA, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

marathe