HANSUBEHN S ZAVERI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a fulltime lecturer in English working at Smt. Sadguna C. U. Arts College for Girls at Ahmedabad by filing the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the decision dated 29/09/1993, rendered by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, Education Department , by which that authority has rejected the request of the petitioner to order the concerned authorities to make necessary change in the service record as regards her birth date, and to change her birthdate from 4/02/199 3/09/1934.

(2.) Under the relevant rules, the superannuation age of the petitioner is 60 years. As stated in the petition, the petitioner joined the Education Department in 1957, and she has put in 36 years of service. When she entered servie, on this basis of the school leaving certificate which she produced, her date of birth as 4/02/1993, came to be recorded in her service record, and all throughout, in her service record that date has been reflected. On the basis of that as her date of birth, she was due for retirement on superannuation, on completion of the relevant academic term in June 1993. For the first time, on 21/06/1992. I.e., only about a year prior to the actual date of her retirement on superannuation, she addressed an application to the Principal of the College where she was serving, for getting the entry about her birth date in the service record changed from 4/02/193 3/09/1934. Thereafter correspondence ensued between the petitioner on the one hand and the concerned authority on the other. The petitioner made a representation for getting the change in her birth date effected. That came to be turned down. Therefore, she filed a writ petition before this Court and in the proceedings of that writ petition, it was decided that she should make a fresh representation for the purpose which the authorities will consider. Accordingly, she made a fresh representation for the purpose, and that representation having been rejected by the order dated 29/09/1993, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

(3.) According to the petitioner, as stated by her in the last few lines of paragraph 7 of the petition at page 10, she has been connected with the Education Department since 1957 and she has put in about 36 years of service. In paragraph 4 of the petition, she has stated that in June 1992, she realised that in the school leaving certificate issued by the school last attended by her, there was an error in writing the date of her birth. Thus, on the petitioner's own showing, for about 35 years that she served in various capacities in the Education Department and in the College, she all throughout believed that the date of her birth as entered in her service record, on the basis of the school leaving certificate was correct. Only about a year prior to the date of her retirement, according to her, she came to learn that in the school leaving certificate, there was an error in mentioning her date of birth, which error has come to be reflected in her service record, and hence she has now started attempts to have that entry about her birth date in the service record changed. I will presently go to the evidence upon which the petitioner relies for contending that there is an error in the entry about her birth date in the service record. But before I do so, I think, it would be worthwhile to have a glance at the relevant rules and the concerned Government Resolution as also some observations and enunciations of Their Lordships of the Supreme Court as also of this Court, which bear on the point.