BABU K.P, Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks for a direction to correct the date of birth as recorded in the service book and service records. As per the service records, petitioner's date of birth is 20/5/1966, which date was reflected in the SSLC Book too. According to the petitioner, his actual date of birth is 17/4/1968 and the same ought to have been entered in his service records.

(2.) Petitioner is working as a Physical Education Teacher having been appointed on 28/2/2001 and approved on 28/1/2003. Mistake of date of birth in the SSLC Book is alleged to have come to the notice of the petitioner only in the year 2004 and it is claimed that the application for correction of date of birth in the school records was filed on 20/12/2004 which was, after the initial rejection, allowed by Ext.P5 order dtd. 2/2/2021. According to the petitioner, the period from 20/12/2004 till 2/2/2021 ought to be excluded, while calculating the time span of five years prescribed in G.O.(P) No. 45/91/P&ARD dtd. 30/12/1991. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment in Achumma v. State of Kerala (2015 (3) KLT 511) and canvassed for the proposition that the delay from the date of application till the date of order ought to be excluded.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent stating that the time limit for correction of date of birth in service book is limited to five years from the date of entry in service as per Ext.P8 Government Order and that it was difficult to believe the statement that petitioner realised the mistake in the SSLC Book and school records in respect of the date of birth only in 2004. Respondent further pleaded that after completing SSLC, petitioner would have submitted various applications specifying the date of birth, especially since 35 years have now elapsed after his birth. According to the 4th respondent, the application for condonation of delay in correcting the service book is almost 20 years after the date of joining the service and the mistake if any in the service records was not on account of any fault of the respondents, but solely on account of the mistake committed by the petitioner and hence, at this belated point of time, the service records cannot be corrected.