GHASIRAM SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P1 dated 03.11.2017 and Annexure P-2 dated 21.05.2018. Annexure P-1 is an order passed by respondent no.3 intimating the date of retirement of the petitioner as 31.01.2018. Annexure P-2 is an order which has been passed by the respondents pursuant to an order passed by this Court in WPS No. 1130/2018 on 05.02.2018.

(2.) Case of the petitioner is that when the petitioner came to know about the erroneous entry of his date of birth, he made a representation to the authority concerned who also acceded his request and made necessary correction in his service book way back in the year 1992 and his date of birth was corrected as 30.06.1957 in place of 05.01.1956, yet the respondents have issued the notice of retirement to the petitioner treating his date of birth as 05.01.1956. Counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court while disposing of WPS No. 1130/2018 had directed the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order which again has been done without proper scrutinizing of the documents and records. Therefore, both the impugned orders deserve to be set aside.

(3.) Perusal of the record would show that the petitioner had approached the Court at the fag end of his career for correcting his date of birth. The earlier writ petition was itself filed on 24th of January, 2018 when he was to retire on 31.01.2018. Moreover, the contention of the petitioner that the respondents had corrected his date of birth is also hard to accept for the reason that the alleged correction seems to be only on the date of birth shown in figure whereas the date of birth shown in words has not been corrected. Thus, it does not seem to be a correction made officially by the department.