SATYA PRAKASH BANSAL Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS special appeal is directed against the order dated 21-3-2001 of learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the very first day without any counter-affidavit or objection to be taken on the record from the respondents. The learned Single Judge held that there is difference in the ink and handwriting in the date of birth mentioned in the service record of the petitioner i. e. , 5-3-1943 and 5-3-1947 and the petitioner, who is a Junior Engineer and must have passed the High School examination, has deliberately not filed the High School Certificate. It appears from the letter dated 23-12-1971 written by Sri R. Rehman, Executive Engineer addressed to the Chief Engineer (Hydel) U. P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow that the original Higher Secondary School Certificate and Diploma of the petitioner were enclosed alongwith the said letter and the date of birth, as per certificate and service book was recorded in the said letter as March 5, 1947 (5-3-1947 ). Since the said original Higher Secondary School Certificate and Diploma were enclosed alongwith the said letter and the date of birth was recorded on the basis of the said certificate by the Executive Engineer as 5-3-1947, there is no reason to reject the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner deliberately did not file the High School Certificate. It appears that the Higher Secondary School Certificate was produced before the Executive Engineer and the Executive Engineer of the department himself noted the date of birth of the petitioner as 5-3-1947, the original record has been produced before us, and we have checked the said record from which it appears that the copy of the letter dated 23-12-1971 written by the Executive Engineer addressed to the Chief Engineer (Hydel), U. P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow is the correct copy and as such there is no reason to dispute that the date of birth of the petitioner on the basis of Higher Secondary School Certificate is 5-3-1947. In fact the respondents failed to produce the said certificate which was kept in their custody. That apart in the event any interpolation made in the service record of the petitioner regarding date of birth was not made by the petitioner, since the service record was kept in the custody of the Executive Engineer of the department, according to the learned Counsel for the respondent himself. In that view of the matter the petitioner cannot be made responsible in the event of any discrepancy in the ink. It is well-settled that in case any dispute arises regarding the date of birth of any such person who is qualified, the date of birth mentioned in the High School Certificate shall be accepted as the correct date of birth. It appears from the record itself and as it is admitted, that the date of birth as mentioned in the High School Certificate is 5-3-1947. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the respondent is estopped from contending otherwise since the Executive Engineer himself under whom the petitioner was working as Junior Engineer mentioned the date of birth of the petitioner as 5-3-1947 in his letter addressed to the Chief Engineer (Hydel), U. P. State Electricity Board, Lucknow on the basis of the High School certificate.

(2.) WE accordingly allow the special appeal to the extent noted above, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge dated 21-3-2001 and direct that the date of birth of the petitioner should be corrected according to the certificate, which is in the custody of respondents, as appears from the letter dated 23- 12-1971 of the Executive Engineer and the petitioner shall be directed to continue in service on the basis of said date of birth i. e. , 5-3-1947. Special appeal allowed .