ULAVAYYA SHIDDAYYA PUJERI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the endorsement (Annexure-A) bearing No.KasheEe/260/Ja.De.Thee/Seeve-2/2012-13 dtd. 11/2/2013 rejecting the request of the petitioner for correction of date of birth.

(2.) Heard Sri A.D. Ramananda, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the writ petition papers.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Associate Professor in S.B. Arts and K.C.P. Science College, an aided Institution. It is submitted that date of birth of the petitioner at the time of entering into service was recorded as 1/1/1963 instead of 22/9/1964. The petitioner filed O.S.No.267/2003 and the said suit was allowed directing the defendants to make necessary correction in his School records with regard to date of birth as 22/9/1964. The same was taken up in appeal by the State Authorities unsuccessfully. It is submitted that the said judgment and decree has become final and the date of birth in his S.S.L.C. marks card and other records have been changed from 1/1/1963 to 22/9/1964. It is submitted that the petitioner was before this Court in W.P.No.6440/2008, which was disposed of on 29/2/2012 directing the Commissioner to afford personal hearing and to pass fresh order in accordance with law, after quashing the endorsement issued negating the petitioner's request for correction of date of birth based on the judgment and decree. Thereafter the present endorsement Annexure-A dtd. 11/2/2013 was issued stating that the petitioner has not made any application under Sec. 5 of the Karnataka State Servants (Determination of Age) Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act') for correction of date of birth within three years as provided under the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents are coming up with the said reason for the first time and they have not raised such an objection at the time of rejection under endorsement dtd. 7/12/2006 (Annexure-G), which was the subject matter before this Court in W.P.No.6440/2008. Further learned counsel would submit that the earlier rejection by the authorities was set aside by this Court with a direction to the respondents to hear the petitioner and pass fresh orders. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.267/2003 would be binding on the respondent- authorities and they are bound to correct the date of birth from 1/1/1963 to 22/9/1964. It is further contended that the authorities have corrected his S.S.L.C. Marks card and based on the same, the Commissioner erred in correcting the date of birth in service records.