NARAYAN RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge is laid in this petition to an order passed by General Manager, Food Corporation of India, dated 25th September, 2015, refusing to correct petitioner's date of birth in the relevant records, as '10.9.1958', instead of '10.9.1955'.

(2.) Brief facts, giving rise to filing of the petition, are that petitioner was appointed on 1.5.1986 as Handling Labour at FSD, Kuraghat. Petitioner's service card, in the prescribed proforma, was prepared on 1.5.1986, in which his date of birth was admittedly mentioned as 10.9.1958. A photocopy of the service card has been enclosed as Annexure -2 to this petition, which is not in dispute. Its perusal shows that petitioner's date of birth was initially recorded as 10.9.1958, which has then been corrected by scoring off 1958 and mentioning 1955 instead. Petitioner asserts that in most of his records, including the contributory provident fund for the year 2012 -2013 issued on 13th May, 2014, his date of retirement was mentioned as 30.9.2018. However, in the pay slip, petitioner's date of retirement was mentioned as 30.9.2015, alongwith his date of birth as 10th September, 1955. An application for correction was moved by the petitioner on 4.5.2015, contending that the correction in the service card was wrong, and his date of birth be got corrected as 10.9.1958. Petitioner has also produced Transfer Certificate, issued from the concerned institution situated in District Nalanda (Bihar), dated 6.1.1967, as a Class -II student, wherein his date of birth is mentioned as 10.9.1958. However, the claim of petitioner was not considered, and as such, a fresh representation is stated to have been sent on 9.9.2015, and when no decision was taken, petitioner filed 53669 of 2015, which was disposed of on 18.9.2015, by the following order: - -

(3.) The order records that in the history card of petitioner, his date of birth is shown as 10.9.1955, and that an affidavit dated 22.8.1987 was submitted by the petitioner accepting his date of birth as 10.9.1955, and in his LTC application form also, his date of birth is mentioned as 10.9.1955. It is also stated that in the cardex form dated 1.6.1996, revised cardex form dated 1.9.2006, employees' family pension scheme, 1971 and group insurance form submitted by the petitioner, his date of birth is mentioned as 10.9.1955. It has been recorded that the proforma form appears to have contained a writing error, which was subsequently corrected and countersigned. It has also been stated that under Clause 3(5)(b) of the Certified Standing Order, the date of birth once entered in the service card of the establishment has to be the sole evidence of his age, in relation to all matters. It is also stated that such mistake, if any, ought to have been brought to the notice of the management within the stipulated time and not at the verge of retirement, and consequently, representation has been rejected.