K SENGENIAMMAL Vs. REGISTRAR PONDICHERRY UNIVERSITY PONDICHERRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the order of the respondent, dated 13.4.2007, rejecting her request for alteration of Date of birth and consequently for a direction to the respondent to alter her date of birth as 12.11.1954.

(2.) FACTS leading to the write petition are as follows:The petitioner was appointed as Part-time Sweeper in the respondent University, vide order of the respondent, dated 13.11.1996 on daily wage basis. By order dated 30.10.1997, the respondent University decided to bring over the part-time sweeper, cum scavengers of the university to the regular establishment as -Safaiwala- on consolidated salary at Rs.1,650/- per month, with effect from 3.10.1997. By order dated 26.2.2001, the respondent has directed the petitioner to produce documentary evidence with regard to her age for the purpose of regularization.As the petitioner was illiterate, she could not produce any records and she brought this predicament to the notice of the respondent, who advised her to get an order from the Court of law for registration of the Date of Birth. Therefore, by letter dated 10.12.2001, the petitioner sought for particulars furnished by her, during the appointment as -Safaiwala- from the respondent. On 21.12.2001, the respondent also furnished the required particulars and thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 to register her birth before the Sub Divisional Magistrate (South) Court at Villianoor and the same was numbered as Cr. M.P. No. 163 of 2001. By order dated 12.7.2002, the respondent brought the petitioner under regular time scale of pay with effect from 3.10.1998. The respondent, by their letter dated 27.8.2003, requested the petitioner to furnish the present status of the case filed by her in the Court regarding the Date of Birth and the same was also furnished to the respondent. After enquiry and on perusing all records, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate (South) Villianoor, by order dated 30.11.2006, allowed the petition filed by the petitioner and ordered that, -the birth of Sengeniaamal (petitioner herein) born to her parents on 12.11.1954 at Kothapurinatham, Mannadipet Commune, be registered in the birth register of Mannadipet Commune Panchayat, Thirubuvanai.- Accordingly, a certificate was also given to the petitioner, showing her Date of Birth as 12.11.1954 by the Mannadipet Commune Panchayat. Thereafter, the petitioner, by letter, dated 15.2.2007, communicated the registration of her Date of Birth to the respondent. But, she was issued with a letter, dated 16.3.2007, regarding the qualifying service put in by her for calculation of gratuity, as on 16.3.2007. Again, by enclosing her Birth Certificate the petitioner represented to the respondent, stating that she was born only on 12.11.1954 and was due to retire only on 11.11.2014, enclosing her birth certificate. Without considering the case of the petitioner, the respondent has passed the impugned order dated 13.4.2007, rejecting her request for alteration of date of birth on the ground that as per the rules, the request for alteration of Dated of Birth should be made within a year or two, before the date of superannuation, Challenging the above said order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) THE respondent has further submitted that on 23.3.2004, the petitioner sent a letter to the respondent-University, stating that she has filed a case in Cr. M.P. No. 163 of 2001 with regard to her age and requested the University not to take any further action till orders are obtained in the above case. On 17.9.2004, the respondent, by a written communication, informed the petitioner that her request cannot be entertained, because, it was only on her request and consent, she was referred to the Medical Board for obtaining a certificate pertaining to her age and based on which, her services were also regularized.