The Bombay High Court rejected the writ by the sales tax officer turned resident district collector for correction of dob after 22 years in service.
The petitioner seeks correction of the date of birth in the service records. It was contended that though the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 1st June 1971 in the school records so also the service records; however, the correct date of birth is 24th December 1973. The petitioner could realise the same only in March 2018 when he visited the native place of his grandfather where renovation work was going on.
The petitioner argued that the date of birth recorded in the school record was not accurate, but was merely an approximation. It was submitted that only because an application is not made within 5 (five) years, that would not be sufficient to negate the case of the petitioner.
It was found that the petitioner was first appointed as District Agriculture Officer at Zilla Parishad on 13th January 1997. In the service records at that time, the date of birth is recorded as 1st June 1971. The petitioner appeared through MPSC and was selected as Sales Tax Officer in June 1997. The petitioner’s date of birth at that time is also recorded as 1st June 1971. The petitioner, in December 2001 is appointed Deputy Collector, Nashik; today, the petitioner is working as Resident District Collector. The service book of the petitioner consistently records the date of birth of the petitioner as 1st June 1971.
The petitioner, at no point in time, had filed an application for correction of date of birth in the service records before approaching the Court. The petitioner is in government service for more than 22 (twenty-two) years. However, he has never applied for correction of the date of birth in the service records.
A division bench comprising Justice S. V. Gangapurwala & Justice Sandeep V Marne observed that as per Rule 38(1) of the Maharashtra Civil Service (General Conditions) Rules 1981, an application ought to have been made within 5 (five) years of entering the service. In the seniority list maintained by the employer, the date of birth of the petitioner is recorded as 1st June 1971 and the petitioner has not objected at any material point of time before the filing of the writ petition. The Court refused to correct the date of birth and dismissed the petition.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
