Md. Fatimuddin Ahmed vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 685 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010173292020




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/5084/2020

            MD. FATIMUDDIN AHMED
            S/O- LT. SIRAJUDDIN AHMED, VILL- MOLLAPARA, P.O. HOWLY
            MOHANPUR, DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM- 784125



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION
            DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-06

            2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
            ASSAM
             IRRIGATION DEPTT.
             CHANDMARI
             GHY-03

            3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
             IRRIGATION DEPTT. (MINOR)
             CHANDMARI
             GHY-03

            4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
             MANGALDAI DIVISION (IRRIGATION)
             MANGALDAI
             DIST.- DARRANG
            ASSAM- 78412

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. MD S HOQUE

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION
                                                                                 Page No.# 2/3


                                         BEFORE
                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO
                                           :ORDER:

25.02.2021

Heard Mr. M. D. Hoque, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Upadhayay, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

The petitioner's service as Muster Roll Worker in the office of the Executive Engineer, (Irrigation Department), Mangaldoi Division, was regularized vide order dated 06.10.2005 and in the regularization order, his date of birth was recorded as 28.02.1961. However, in his service book his date of birth was entered as 28.02.1966, based on school certificate issued by the Headmaster of Rajapukhuri Chamuakhat High School in Darrang district. Based on his service book his identity card was issued by the Executive Engineer, (Irrigation Department) Mangaldoi Division, and in that also his date of birth was given as 28.02.1966. On 15.10.2020 a notice no. EG/11/2020/1102 was issued by the Executive Engineer, (Irrigation Department) Mangaldoi Division wherein the date on which he will superannuate from service was given as 28.02.2021. Being aggrieved by this the petitioner is before this Court by filing the instant writ petition.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the date of birth of the petitioner recorded as 28.02.1966 is the correct one and it is based on school certificate which was issued before the service book was open and the regularization order was issued. Therefore, his date of birth given in the regularization order which is incorrect and without any basis cannot be the basis for fixing his date of retirement from service.

The learned counsel further submitted that based on the service book, the petitioner was also issued an identity card in which his date of birth was given as in the service book, as such, the impugned order which gives the petitioner's date of superannuation as 28.02.2021 would need to be quashed and set aside in respect of the petitioner. The learned counsel sought to support his submission with a judgment of a coordinate bench of this High Court dated 28.09.2017 passed in WP(C) 7322/2017.

Mr. N. Upadhayay, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in the service book of Page No.# 3/3

the petitioner where his date of birth is entered, there is a mark of cancelling some scripts which were earlier written, Therefore, the entry made in the service book is doubtful. He also submitted that as it was done in similar cases a direction may be issued for conducting an enquiry for ascertaining the date of birth of the petitioner.

On perusal of the service book, it is seen that there is some marks of cancelling some writing at the column where the date of birth of the petitioner is entered. However, it is mentioned therein that the date of birth i.e. 28.02.1966 is as per the school certificate and, a copy of the school certificate is found attached to the service book. Therefore, prima facie it appears that the date of birth of the petitioner as entered in his service book was based on the school certificate he last attended. The service book is in the custody of the employers and not in the custody of the employee, therefore, it could not have been manipulated by the petitioner himself. On the other hand, there is nothing in the record which would show as to, on what basis 28.02.2021 was entered as date of birth of the petitioner in his regularization order.

Taking all the above into consideration, this Court is of the prima facie view that the petitioner's date of birth as recorded in his service book is the correct one. Therefore, the impugned order dated 15.10.2020 issued by the Executive Engineer, (Irrigation Department) Mangaldoi Division wherein the date of superannuation of the petitioner from his service is given as 28.02.2021 is quashed and set aside in respect of the petitioner. However, this order shall not stand as a bar for further enquiry if the respondents want to do so on the genuineness of the school certificate based on which date of birth of the petitioner was entered in his service book.

This writ petition stands disposed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant