SHIVPAL SINGH UIKEY Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Rakesh Gautam, Learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sudhir K. Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the impugned communication/notice dated 29-6-2006 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer respondent No. 2 informing the petitioner that he shall retire from service on 31-12-2006 on attaining the age of superannuation.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the petitioner was working as a Mechanic Grade-I in the office of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sub-Division I, Rani Awanti Bai Sagar Project, Bargi Nagar, Jabalpur. On 11 -6-2002 the respondent No. 4 issued a letter to the petitioner directing him to submit documents certifying the date of birth of the petitioner as the same was not in his service book. In compliance the petitioner submitted a letter of the Head Master of the Government Primary School Sontalai, Tahsil Itarsi, District Hoshangabad certifying the petitioner's date of birth to be 1-7-1950 according to Sr. No. 128 of the School Admission Register. The respondent No. 4 issued letter to the Head Master of the concerned Primary School on 30-7-2002 seeking verification of the certificate in response to which the Head Master of the school issued letter dated 6-9-2002 to the respondent No. 4 certifying that the date of birth of the petitioner was 1 -7-1950 according to the entries made in the School Register. On 1-10-2002 the respondent No. 4 directed the petitioner to submit a School Transfer Certificate in compliance to which the petitioner obtained the School Transfer Certificate from the Head Master of the concerned school wherein the date of birth of the petitioner was certified to be 1-7-1950.

(3.) It is submitted by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that initially at the time of entering into service in the absence of any certificate the respondents have mentioned the date of birth of the petitioner to be 1-1-1947 but subsequently the respondent authorities themselves asked for and got the certificate verified issued by the concerned school and the certificate in support thereof. It is submitted that his date of birth is 1-7-1950 in spite of which the respondents treated the date of birth of the petitioner to be 1-1-1947 and issued the impugned communication although the respondent No. 4 had forwarded the service book of the petitioner to the Executive Engineer on 30-11-2002 for correction of his date of birth vide Annexure P-9. It is stated that the petitioner had filed a representation before the authority asking for correction of his date of birth and permitting him to continue in service on 30-10-2006 which was duly forwarded by the respondent No. 4 on 30-11 -2006 stating therein that the date of birth has been verified from the concerned school who has certified the date of birth as 1-7-1950 and requesting the Executive Engineer to pass order on the petitioner's representation. The Chief Engineer, Rani Awanti Bai Sagar Project also recommended the case of the petitioner on 2-5-1997 for appropriate action by the respondent No. 3 but the respondent No. 3, Executive Engineer, has not passed any order thereon resulting in serious prejudice to the petitioner which amounts to infringement of his fundamental right.