Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The Deputy General Manger Hr,Anot vs Namuduri Nageswara Rao,Anot
2022 Latest Caselaw 1883 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1883 Tel
Judgement Date : 13 April, 2022

Telangana High Court
The Deputy General Manger Hr,Anot vs Namuduri Nageswara Rao,Anot on 13 April, 2022
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                                    AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                                          W.A.No.26 of 2016
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)

          The present appeal is arising out of Order dated 01.06.2015,

passed by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.6758 of 2012.

          The facts of the case reveal that respondent No.1 before this

Court (writ petitioner), who was serving the State Bank of

Hyderabad (SBH) on the post of Deputy Manager, at the fag end of

his service, has preferred the aforesaid writ petition in the month of

February, 2012, for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or

direction, directing the SBH/employer to change his date of birth

in his service records from 09.04.1952 to 11.08.1953.

The petitioner contended before the learned Single Judge

that his correct date of birth was 11.08.1953, however, it was

entered incorrectly as 09.04.1952 by his father at the time of his

admission into the school.

The undisputed facts of the case further reveal that in the

Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC), his date of birth is ::2::

mentioned as 09.04.1952; he has cleared SSLC in 1968, passed PUC

in 1969 and B.Sc., in April, 1972, from Government Arts College,

Rajahmundry, under Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, and in all

his educational certificates, the date of birth mentioned

is 09.04.1952.

The petitioner was thereafter, appointed as cashier-cum-

clerk in the service of SBH on 25.10.1976 and while joining the

services, he has mentioned his date of birth as 09.04.1952 only.

The petitioner came up with the case that he kept on

representing with the employer for correction of date of birth.

However, as in his educational certificates, his date of birth was

mentioned as 09.04.1952, he was advised to file a civil suit and the

same was filed accordingly.

In the civil suit being O.S.No.136 of 1980, filed by the

petitioner, a decree was passed on 01.05.1980 directing the

Registrar, Andhra University, to correct the date of birth of the

petitioner as 11-08-1953. As his date of birth was corrected by the

University, the petitioner, armed with the judgment and decree and

the certificate issued by the University, made a representation ::3::

before the employer. However, the employer rejected his claim on

17.02.2012 i.e., just before two months of his retirement.

The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition

preferred by the writ petitioner based upon the judgment and

decree dated 01.05.1980 in O.S.No.136 of 1980 and the subsequent

alteration done by the Andhra University in his educational

certificates.

In the considered opinion of this Court, the judgment and

decree passed in the civil suit was certainly not at all binding upon

the employer as the employer was not a party to the civil suit. The

petitioner became employee of SBH on 25.10.1976. The civil suit

was preferred in the year 1980 and nothing prevented the employee

to implead his employer i.e., SBH as one of the defendants.

Therefore, no benefit could have been given to the petitioner based

upon a judgment and decree passed in a civil suit, in which the

SBH was not a party.

Otherwise also, the present case is of an employee, who

wanted his date of birth to be corrected and approached this Court

at the fag end of his service. The writ petition was filed in the ::4::

month of February, 2012 and he was due to retirement on

30.04.2012.

In the light of the judgment delivered in the case of

Secretary and Commissioner, Home Department v.

R.Kirubakaram1, this Court is of the opinion that Order

dated 01.06.2015, passed by the learned Single Judge, in

W.P.No.6758 of 2012, deserves to be set aside and the same is,

accordingly, set aside.

Writ Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand

dismissed.

______________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Date: 13-04-2022 LUR

AIR 1993 SC 2647

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter