Patna High Court
Raja Ram vs The State Of Bihar on 4 March, 2025
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1474 of 2021
======================================================
Raja Ram Son of Late Puran Ram Resident Of Village Mathiya, P.O.
Basantpur, P.S. Basantpur, District Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director General, Home Guard, Bihar, Patna
2. The Director General, Home Guard, Bihar, patna
3. The District Magistrate, Siwan
4. The District Commandant, Siwan
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyamakant Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Harun Quarishi, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 04-03-2025
Heard Mr. Shyamakant Singh, learned Advocate for
the petitioner and Mr. Harun Quaraishi, learned Advocate for
the State.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is restricted only to
the extent whereby the respondent authorities have compelled
the petitioner to superannuate one year prior to the actual date of
his retirement by treating the age of the petitioner as 19 years at
Patna High Court CWJC No.1474 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
2/7
the time of selection. For redressal of the grievance, the
petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court seeking a
direction to consider his representation, which is pending before
the competent authority.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner referring to the
averments made in the writ petition has contended that the
petitioner on being duly appointed as Home Guard in the year
1979, he was allotted Home Guard No. 3669 and sent for
training. It is the contention of the petitioner that as per the
matriculation certificate, his date of birth was duly mentioned as
24.12.1961
, which fact also get supported by other certificates,
including the Aadhar Card. The authorities concerned had never
disclosed regarding the imaginary date mentioned in the
nomination register, however, at the fag end when the petitioner
came to know that at the time of selection, his age was
prescribed only 19 years in the nomination register, he
immediately represented to the Director General, Bihar Home
Guard, Headquarters, Patna as well as the District Magistrate,
Siwan summarizing his bonafide claims with a request to allow
him to continue his services by taking note of his actual date of
birth i.e., 24.12.1961 recorded in the certificate. However, the
authority did not examine the claim of the petitioner and, in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1474 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
meantime, the petitioner was compelled to retire on 01.01.2020.
Hence, the present writ petition.
4. Per contra, learned Advocate for the State
dispelling the aforesaid contention has contended that the period
of service of the petitioner has been computed on the basis of
entry in the nomination register maintained in the office of the
respondent no. 4. As per the nomination register, the age of the
petitioner on the date and time of selection has been recorded as
19 years. Entries of the nomination register kept and maintained
in the normal course are binding and this entry has never been
questioned by the petitioner during his service career. However
after the retirement, the present writ petition has been preferred.
The issue raised before this Court has also been considered by a
Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 2507 of 2006 which came to
be disposed of vide order dated 11.10.2010, whereby primacy to
entries of nomination register has been given.
5. This Court has heard the learned Advocates for the
respective parties, and perused the materials available on record.
It is the admitted position that the petitioner was duly appointed
long back and the age of the petitioner in the nomination
register is recorded as 19 years, any change in the date of birth
or entry in the nomination register on the basis of matriculation
Patna High Court CWJC No.1474 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
certificate obtained later on, after about 40 years of service
cannot be permitted in the facts of the present case.
6. This Court, in identical matter in the case of
Subodh Paswan vs. The State of Bihar & Ors in CWJC No.
2326 of 2019, while negating the claim of the identically
situated Home Guard seeking prayer for alteration of his date of
birth at the fag end, has reiterated the observation of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, which would be worth benefiting to encapsulate
hereinunder:
12. The law with regard to the correction of date of
birth at the fag end of service has been duly
considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court on various
occasions. In the State of T.N. v. T.V. Venugopalan
[(1994) 6 SCC 302], the Hon'ble Court has
observed that the government servant should not
be permitted to correct the date of birth at the fag
end of his service career. It would be worth
benefiting to encapsulate the relevant observation.
"7. ... The government servant having
declared his date of birth as entered in
the service register to be correct,
would not be permitted at the fag end
of his service career to raise a dispute
as regards the correctness of the
entries in the service register. It is
common phenomenon that just before
superannuation, an application would
be made to the Tribunal or court just to
gain time to continue in service and the
Tribunal or courts are unfortunately
unduly liberal in entertaining and
Patna High Court CWJC No.1474 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
allowing the government employees or
public employees to remain in office,
which is adding an impetus to resort to
the fabrication of the record and place
reliance thereon and seek the authority
to correct it. When rejected, on grounds
of technicalities, question them and
remain in office till the period claimed
for, gets expired. This case is one such
stark instance. Accordingly, in our
view, the Tribunal has grossly erred in
showing overindulgence in granting
the reliefs even trenching beyond its
powers of allowing him to remain in
office for two years after his date of
superannuation even as per his own
case and given all conceivable
directions beneficial to the employee. It
is, therefore, a case of the grossest
error of law committed by the Tribunal
which cannot be countenanced and
cannot be sustained on any ground."
13. In Secretary and Commissioner, Home
Department and Others v. R. Kirubakaran [1994
Supp (1) SCC 155], the Hon'ble Supreme Court
while reiterating the legal position that the Courts
have to be extremely careful when application for
alteration of the date of birth is filed on the eve of
superannuation or near about that time, has
succinctly observed that whenever an application
for alteration of the date of birth is made on the
eve of superannuation or near about that time, the
court or the tribunal concerned should be more
cautious because of the growing tendency
amongst a section of public servants, to raise such
a dispute, without explaining as to why this
question was not raised earlier.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1474 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
14. In State of Uttaranchal and Others v.
Pitamber Dutt Semwal [(2005) 11 SCC 477], the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has denied the relief to
the government employee on the ground that he
sought correction in the service record after
nearly 30 years of service with an observation that
the High Court ought not to have interfered with
the decision after such a long period.
15. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development
Limited v. T.P. Nataraja and Others with other
analogous cases [(2021) 12 SCC 27], after reiterating
the various decisions, covering the issue on this point,
has summarized the law on the issue of correction of
date of birth in para-11 of the decision, which is
quoted hereunder.
"11. Considering the aforesaid
decisions of this Court the law on
change of date of birth can be
summarised as under:
(i) application for change of date of
birth can only be as per the relevant
provisions/regulations applicable;
(ii) even if there is cogent evidence, the
same cannot be claimed as a matter of
right;
(iii) application can be rejected on the
ground of delay and laches also more
particularly when it is made at the fag-
end of service and/or when the employee
is about to retire on attaining the age of
superannuation."
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and the position
obtaining in law, especially the entries in the nomination register
Patna High Court CWJC No.1474 of 2021 dt.04-03-2025
showing the age of the petitioner as 19 years at the time of
selection as also the delay and laches in approaching the
authority and the Court at the fag end of the service, this Court
does not find any merit in the writ petition. The writ petition
stands dismissed, accordingly.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 05.03.2025
Transmission Date
