Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kallu Kol vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 April, 2022
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
W.P. No. 12590/2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
ON THE 22nd OF APRIL, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 12590 of 2021
Between:-
KALLU KOL S/O LATE SHRI BEERAN, AGED
ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GANG MAN
(PERMANENT EMPLOYEE) SUB DIVISION,
CIVIL LINES PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
SUB DIVISION NO. 1 (CIVIL LINES) REWA
DISTT. REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AJEET KUMAR SINGH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS
1. DEPARTMENT, VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT, NIRMAN BHAWAN, PLOT NO.
2. 27, 28, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT, REWA DIVISION, SIRMOR
3. CHOURAHA, REWA, DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT DIVISION NO. 1 (B/R) NEAR
4. SWAGAT BHAWAN, REWA, DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (B/R) PUBLIC
WORKS DEPARTMENT, SUB DIVISION NO. 1,
5.
CIVIL LINES REWA, DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ABHAY SHANKAR PATHAK, LEARNED GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
THE RESPONDENTS/STATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
W.P. No. 12590/2021
2
ORDER
Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.
2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner has assailed the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated
08.07.2021 (Annexure-P/1) passed by respondent No. 5 whereby the petitioner
has been made to superannuate w.e.f. 31.07.2021 on the ground that as per entry
made in the service book of the petitioner, the petitioner has completed 62 years
of service on 31.07.2021.
3. Brief facts leading to filing of the case are that the petitioner was appointed
as a muster roll employee on the post of Labour. On introduction of the scheme by
the State Government i.e. Sthai Karmi Yojna, the petitioner was confirmed as
permanent employee (Labourer) on 06.05.2017. Being aggrieved, the instant
petition has been filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the actual date of birth of the
petitioner is 01.01.1966 as per Aadhar Card and Pen Card, The petitioner is
illiterate person, therefore, he is entitled to continue in service upto 31.01.2028. In
view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 08.07.2021 may be quashed and
the respondents may be directed to permit the petitioner to continue in service
upto 31.01.2028.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as per
the service record maintained with the respondents, date of birth of the petitioner
is 01.07.1959. Based on these records, the petitioner stood superannuated w.e.f.
31.07.2021. The petitioner never raised a dispute with regard to the incorrect date
W.P. No. 12590/2021
of birth during his entire service career. Now, on the verge of retirement, the
dispute has been raised, which is not permissible. He further stated that the
petition is hopelessly barred by time, therefore, the same deserves to be dismissed
on the ground of delay and laches.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on the Apex Court
decision in the case of Eastern Coalfields Limited and others Vs. Ram Samugh
Yadav and others, reported in (2020) 3 SCC 421, to contend that prayer for
change in the date of birth at the fag end of service career is impermissible.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents also placed reliance on the Apex court
decision in the case of Bharat Coking Coal Limited and others Vs. Shyam
Kishore Singh, reported in (2020) 3 SCC 411, in which it is held that the writ
petition filed by the respondents four years after his retirement seeking restoration
of his appointment, the same cannot be done and prayer for change in date of birth
in service register cannot be entertained at the fag end of service after accepting
the same to be correct during entire service. It was further held that merely
because verification was made from Bihar School Examination Board by
appellant on receiving representation in the year 2009 and even if it is confirmed
that date of birth was 20.1.1995 such change at that stage was not permissible and
the indulgence shown by the High Court was misplaced.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. It is not in dispute that the petitioner joined as a labour. The position is well
established that if a particular date of birth is entered in the service register, a
change sought cannot be entertained at the fag end of service after accepting the
same to be correct during the entire service. Further the petitioner did not avail the
W.P. No. 12590/2021
judicial remedy immediately on entering the service. Instead, in the year 2021,
when the petitioner was to retire, just before he preferred this writ petition for
correction in the date of birth.
10. In such circumstances and in the light of the judgment of the Apex court in
the case of Bharat Coking Coal Limited (supra), no indulgence can be shown to
the petitioner. The respondents have rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner
which is in accordance with the settled legal position.
11. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merit or substance in the claim of
the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition is hereby dismissed.
(S.A. DHARMADHIKARI)
JUDGE
ashish
Digitally signed by ASHISH
KUMAR LILHARE
Date: 2022.04.23 15:20:59
+05'30'
