KHAYAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri N.C.Srivastava, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for the quashing of the order dated 16.1.2006 whereby the Executive Engineer informed the petitioner that he would retire w.e.f. 30.11.2006 as well as the order dated 29.7.2006 by which the representation of the petitioner was rejected by the Engineer-in-Chief.

(3.) The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition, as culled out from the affidavit that has been filed before the Court and the original service register that has been produced today is, that the petitioner was appointed on 18.11.1977 in the Irrigation Department. The Service Book of the petitioner was prepared in the year 1987 and, at that stage, the petitioner's age was recorded as 31 years. In 1987 the petitioner was directed to appear before the Chief Medical Officer with regard to the verification of his date of birth. The petitioner appeared and the Chief Medical Officer, on the basis of his medical examination, issued a certificate dated 1.9.1987 indicating that as on 1.9.1987 the age of the petitioner was 35 years. On the basis of this certificate, the entry of 31 years in the service register was deleted and was substituted by the words "thirty-five years as on 1.9.1987 according to the C.M.O., Bijnore". The original service book indicates that the petitioner as well as the Assistant Engineer both have signed on 26.4.1996 acknowledging the aforesaid entry with regard to the date of birth.