Patna High Court
Chandrika Prasad vs The State Of Bihar on 24 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1435 of 2021
======================================================
Chandrika Prasad Son of Barahan Yadav Resident of village- Singarpur, P.s.-
Chanan, District- Lakhisarai (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Home,
Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Director General -cum- Commandant General, Bihar Home Guard,
Bihar, Patna
4. The Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai
5. The District Commandant, Home Guard, Lakhisarai
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, GP 4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 24-01-2022
The matter is heard via video conferencing due to
circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the
following relief/reliefs:
"I. In the nature of "Mandamus" directing
and commanding the respondent authorities to amend
the date of birth of the petitioner in departmental
Roll/documents which has been reflected as 19 years at
the time of recruitment giving date of birth as 12-01-
1961 to 12-01-1966 in accordance with the
matriculation certificate.
II. In the nature of mandamus directing and
commanding the respondent authorities not to retire
the petitioner before the age of superannuation as has
Patna High Court CWJC No.1435 of 2021 dt.24-01-2022
been conveyed orally that petitioner shall be retiring in
the month of December, 2020.
III. For any other relief for which the
petitioner is entitled in the fact and circumstances of
the instant case."
3. Short question for consideration in the present petition
whether petitioner is entitled to alter his date of birth from
12.01.1961 to that of 12.01.1966 with reference to matriculation
certificate or not? Undisputed facts are that the petitioner joined
service on 15.10.1980. For correction of date of birth in the service
record, he had submitted representation for the first time on
05.10.2020. In the light of these facts and circumstances read with
the Apex Court decision that an employee is not entitled to correct
his date of birth in the service record at the fag end of his service.
The petitioner has not apprised this Court as to how to overcome
the delay and laches from the date of joining service i.e.
15.10.1980 and within a reasonable period of three years from the
date of joining that he had made efforts to correct his date of birth
by means of representation or application, therefore, the petitioner
is not entitled to correct his date of birth at the fag end of his
service.
4. Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that petitioner had no knowledge of date of birth entered
in the service record. Petitioner being a Home Guard, he must be
Patna High Court CWJC No.1435 of 2021 dt.24-01-2022
aware of date of birth entered in the service record during the
intervening period from 1990 to 1993 or further. In the light of
these facts and circumstances, the contention of the petitioner's
counsel that the petitioner was not aware of entry of date of birth
in the service record cannot be appreciated.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 28.01.2022
Transmission Date
