RAVINDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An unsuccessful attempt in getting the date of birth corrected in service records before a learned Single Judge had lead to filing of present appeal.

(2.) Petition filed by appellant for correction of his date of birth in the service records was rejected by Government. Reason for such rejection was that the application was filed beyond time limit provided in the concerned Government Order, i. e., G. O. (P) 45/91/P and A.R.D., dated 30th December 1991. That order provides for a time limit of five years from date of entry in service for purpose of filing application for correction of date of birth in the service records. Appellant, being a person in service on the date of the said Government Order, ought to have moved application within one year from 30th December 1991. Admittedly, same was filed on 12th November 1998. In such circumstances, application was rejected. Appellant's stand before learned Single Judge was that he obtained confection of date of birth entered in the school records only on 10th November 1998 and immediately thereafter applied for correction of date of birth in the service records. Learned Single Judge has observed that time limits were specifically provided setting out outer limits by which application has to be filed. There was no impediment standing on appellant's way in making application for correction even before receipt of order passed by the Joint Secretary in General Education (G) Department (Ext. P-15). He could have adduced available evidence to show his date of birth within the time limit prescribed in Government Order dated 30th December 1991. Order of the Commissioner for Government Examinations correcting date of birth in school records could have been produced at the time of consideration of his application. That was not done.

(3.) According to learned counsel for appellant, there is no rational giving only one year time for making an application. Prescription of definite time limit can, in a given case, stand on the way of a genuinely affected employee getting justice. Learned counsel for State submitted that there is no illegality in prescribing a time limit. Adequate time was given to those who could not seek correction of date of birth within the time frame indicated by Government Order dated 30th December 1991. It has not been shown as to how the time limit provided is arbitrary or unreasonable.