J.U.M. RAO, E451 173, APSRTC DRIVER EAST GODAVARI DIST Vs. A.P.S.R.T.C. REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The petitioner was appointed as driver in the respondent Corporation in the year 1988 after undergoing the process of selection. He was posted to Palakonda Depot and presently working in Gokavaram Depot. As the petitioner is not well educated, he could not submit any certificate in support of his qualification. He was sent for medical examination and was certified to be of the age of 27 years by Medical Certificate dated 27.01.1988. On the basis of said certificate, the date of birth of petitioner was recorded as 27.01.1961, as per which the petitioner would superannuate on 30.01.2019. The said date of birth continued in the service record from the date of his appointment till 2016. However, on 14.07.2016, an order was passed intimating that the petitioner was deemed to have retired from service with effect from 14.07.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years, by declaring his date of birth as 01.07.1958, on the basis of application filed by the petitioner stating that he was aged about 29 years as on 01.07.1987. Challenging the same, the present writ petition was filed.

(2.) A counter affidavit is filed by the respondents stating that the petitioner was appointed as driver on casual basis in the year 1988 by the Selection Committee and he was decasualised with effect from 17.05.1990. He was transferred to East Godavari Region and posted to Gokavaram Depot. While scrutinising the personal case of petitioner while effecting promotion to Grade-1 post, the Personal Officer, Rajahmundry found that the date of birth of petitioner was wrongly recorded as 27.01.1961 as per the medical certificate, but he was aged about 29 years as on 10.07.1987, based on the application filed by the petitioner. In those circumstances, the Personal Officer issued proceedings on 13.07.2016 stating that on verification of the P.Cases of employees during selection of Grade-1 promotions, it was observed that the date of birth of petitioner was wrongly recorded as 27.01.1961 basing on the medical certificate, but on the basis of declaration of the petitioner himself, his date of birth should be taken as 01.07.1958. The counter affidavit further states that as per the Service Regulations, whenever a candidate does not furnish satisfactory evidence of his age, it should be assessed by a Medical Officer of the Corporation and the age so assessed or the age as declared by the person, whichever is more, shall be accepted as final. Since the petitioner himself declared his age as 29 years as on 01.07.1987, his date of birth should have been treated as 01.07.1958. In those circumstances only, the petitioner was retired with effect from 14.07.2016, on the basis of endorsement made on the note passed by the Regional Manager.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri S.V.Ramana, Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation.