K S SRIPATHI IAS Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was selected and appointed in the Indian Administrative Service on 13.7.1975. According to the petitioner, his correct date of birth is 9.10.1951, but due to 'clerical error' committed at the time of his entry in the school, his date of birth was wrongly entered as 28.4.1950 and the same was carried in his service book also. It is submitted by the petitioner that in the year 1979, when marriage proposals were initiated for him, it was found that his correct date of birth was 9.10.1951 as per the horoscope/'jathakam', which was confirmed by the Sub Registrar, Bhavani, issuing a Birth Certificate, declaring the petitioner's date of birth as 9.10.1951. THEreupon, the petitioner, by his application dated 23.1.1980, i.e. within five years of his entry into the service, has approached the respondents 2 and 3 for alteration of his date of birth. Based on the said application, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gobichettipalayam, after making local enquiry, as directed by the Government of Tamil Nadu, has submitted his report dated 26.3.1980, stating that the petitioner's date of birth was 9.10.1951 and the Board of Revenue, by its proceedings dated 14.4.1980 has accepted the report of the Revenue Divisional Officer and recommended that the petitioner's date of birth be altered accordingly. But, the 2nd respondent, by his letter dated 12.7.1980, has informed him that it was not possible to accede to his request for alteration of his date of birth, to which, the petitioner sent a detailed representation on 24.1.1981, which was also rejected on 3.9.1985.

(2.) THEREUPON, the petitioner filed O.S.No.3084 of 1986 before the VII City Civil Court, Chennai, after issuing a legal notice, for declaration of his date of birth as 9.10.1951 and by the judgment dated 24.10.1996, the said suit was decreed, declaring the petitioner's correct date of birth as 9.10.1951 and directed that consequential change must be effected in the SSLC book, Service Book etc. The petitioner filed E.P.No.2262 of 2000 and thereafter, based on the said judgment, the Director of School Education has altered the petitioner's date of birth in the SSLC Book. But, after more than six years, the 2nd respondent challenged the said judgment and decree before the High Court, by filing Civil Revision Petition No.298 of 2002 under Article 227 of the Constitution, which was disposed of by the High Court on 29.8.2003, holding that the judgment and decree of the City Civil Court was without jurisdiction as no declaration for alteration of date of birth in the service book could be granted by the civil court, pursuant to the constitution of the Central Administrative Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act. As a result, the petitioner filed O.A.No.347 of 2004 before the 1st respondent Tribunal to direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to alter his date of birth from 28.4.1950 to 9.10.1951 in his service records for all purposes. Since the Tribunal has dismissed the Original Application filed by him, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(3.) AS seen from the above Rule 16-A(2), the date of birth as declared by such person in the application for recruitment to the service shall be accepted by the Central Government as the date of birth of such person and as per Rule 16-A(4), the date of birth as accepted by the Central Government shall not be subject to any alteration except where it is established that a bona fide clerical mistake has been committed in accepting the date of birth under Sub-Rule (2) or (3). Thus, there are two contingencies as per this Rule, the first one is 'declaration of date of birth as per Rule 16-A(2) or (3) by the applicant' and 'acceptance of such declared date of birth by the Central Government'. For any alteration to be effected regarding the date of birth, declared by the applicant in his application for recruitment to the service and accepted by the Central Government, it must be proved by the applicant that a bona fide clerical mistake has been committed in accepting his date of birth by the Central Government. Until and unless it is proved by the applicant, the question of alteration of date of birth of the applicant does not at all arise. In this back drop, now we shall proceed to discuss the case on hand.