Delhi High Court
Union Of India And Ors vs Padam Loachan on 4 February, 2016
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 12273/2015
Date of decision: 4th February, 2016
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ashok Singh, Advocate.
versus
PADAM LOACHAN ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Khairati Lal and Mr. Prakash
Chandra, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
SANJIV KHANNA, J. (ORAL)
The General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, the
Divisional Railway Manager and Senior DME/Diesel have filed this writ
petition impugning order dated 06.02.2015, passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA
No.4472/2013. The impugned order allows the aforesaid OA filed by
Padam Loachan seeking correction of his date of birth to 15.04.1956 in
place of 11.06.1955 as recorded in the service book, in view of the
school leaving certificate produced by the respondent.
2. The impugned order observes that the petitioners herein could not
give any reason why the date of birth in the service book was recorded
as 11.06.1955 instead of 15.04.1956 and why no attempt was made to
change it afterwards, when the school certificate was produced by the
respondent herein at the time of appointment.
3. A perusal of the service book, photocopy of which has been
placed on record as annexure P-3, indicates that respondent was inducted
as a Pointsman on 4.10.1976 and had declared his date of birth as
11.06.1955. A note to the service book stipulates that entries on this
page should be renewed or re-attested after every five years, and the
signature in line 22 should be dated and attested by the attesting officer
with his designation. Respondent has signed the service book at four
places which indicates that he had certainly examined this book on at
least four occasions.
4. The school certificate issued by SBAC High School, Bajwara,
District Hoshiarpur is dated 29.06.1978. It mentions the respondent's
date of birth as 15.04.1956. It is obvious that the finding of the Tribunal
that the respondent had given this certificate when he had joined the
service in 1976 is incorrect and a wrong finding, for the certificate was
purportedly issued in the year 1978. The respondent has not placed any
document on record to show that he had at any time or on any occasion
from 1976 to 1978 made any correspondence or objected to the date of
birth as recorded in the service book. Even after 1978, the respondent
did not correspond or object to the date of birth as recorded. The first
application for amendment of the date of birth was moved after 37 years
of appointment or thereafter, and the OA was filed before the Tribunal
nearly 38 years after his joining the service.
5. It is obvious that the Tribunal has failed to notice the delay and
latches on the respondent's part in seeking "correction" of his date of
birth. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to
the Master Circular No.12 regarding the procedure for recording the date
of birth on entering Railway service and alteration of the date of birth
once recorded. As per the said circular, declaration of the date of birth
on appointment requires production of confirmatory/documentary
evidence such as matriculation certificate or a municipal certificate. In
absence of such evidence or any other authenticated documentary
evidence, the employee can be asked to produce an affidavit in support
of declaration of his/her age. It has been stipulated that for Group C and
D Railway employees, the date of birth as recorded in accordance with
the rules shall be binding and no alteration of such date shall ordinarily
be permitted subsequently. Date of birth at the option of the employee
can be altered when satisfactory explanation is provided as to the
circumstances in which the wrong date of birth came to be entered in the
service book, together with the statement of previous attempts made to
amend the said record. It is also stipulated that such a request should not
be entertained after completion of probation period or three years of
service, whichever is earlier. It is clear that no request or prayer for
change of date of birth was made within said time line. The respondent
has not furnished and given any explanation for the delay and laches.
There was acquiescence in view of the fact that the respondent had
signed the service book on four separate occasions.
6. The petitioners have also filed photo copies of leave account
forms on the record. On several leave account forms, the date of birth is
recorded as 15.04.1955, though we notice that on some pages attempts
have been made to interpolate the year 1955 as 1956. In any case, this
does not make any difference as the date of birth mentioned in the
service book is material and relevant.
7. In view of the aforesaid position, we allow the present writ
petition and set aside and quash the Tribunal's order dated 6th February,
2015, directing the petitioners to change the date of birth from 11 th June,
1955 to 15th April, 1956. There will be no order as to costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
FEBRUARY 04, 2016
NA
