ACHHAIBAR MAURYA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -We have heard Sri D. K. Maurya, learned counsel for the appellant and also perused the order of Hon'ble single Judge.

(2.) THE short controversy involved in this appeal is whether the petitioner/appellant whose date of birth is 1.7.1943, is entitled to get sessions benefit available to a person who attained the age of superannuation ongoing Session.

(3.) HOWEVER, the learned counsel for the petitioner / appellant vehemently contended that his date of birth being 1.7.1943, he cannot be treated to have attained 60 years of age on 30th June, i.e., the day preceding the date of birth and since he attained the age of 60 years on 1.7.2003, therefore, is entitled for the benefit of Academic Session, i.e., to continue till 30.6.2004. The aforesaid submission, in our view, is not correct. There is a general misconception that person attains a particular age on the date on which he was born. The correct position is that in the absence of an express provision, the settled principle is that a specified age in law is to be computed as having been attained on the day preceding the anniversary of the birthday. In Halsbury's Laws of England, 3rd Edition, Vol. 37, para 178 at page 100 the law on the subject has been stated as under : "In computing a period of time, at any rate when counted in years or months no regard is, as a general rule, paid to fractions of a day, in the sense that the period is recorded as complete although it is short to the extent of a fraction of a day.................. similar, in calculating a person's age the day of his birth counts as a whole day, and he attains a specified age on the day next before the anniversary of his birthday."