SARJUPASWAN Vs. ASSAM AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of the case which would be necessary to complete the adjudication required, may be cited. The petitioner was appointed as a Night Chowkidar in the then Assam Agricultural College at Jorhat on 24.11.1967. The college became a constituent college under the Assam Agricultural University by virtue of the Assam Agricultural University Act, 1968. The petitioner continued to be in employment under the University and by an order dated 27.3.87, he was granted the revised scale of pay applicable to University employees. At the time of entry into service, the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 1.1.1935. The petitioner subsequently submitted an application for correction of date of his birth to 2.12.1944 and the said application was accompanied by a certificate issued by the school where the petitioner studied. The claim made by the writ petitioner was accepted and by order dated 2.2.95, he was informed that his date of birth is now recorded as 2.12.1944 and that he would be due for retirement on 2.12.2004.

(2.) The petitioner, thereafter, received a letter dated 22.2.2000 issued by the Administrative Officer of the University asking him to submit the original school certificate for verification of his date ofbirth. The order of the Administrative Officer was duly complied with. The authenticity of the school certificate was sought to be verified by the authority but, as no significant headway could be made in this regard, the petitioner was sent for a medical examination for determination of his age. The aforesaid medical examination was held on 29.6.2000 and though the medical opinion was not very specific, it was suggestive of the fact that the petitioner would be about 56 years old on the date of examination. The authority took no further action in the matter but withheld the pay of the petitioner. Aggrieved, the petitioner instituted WP(c) 5316/2000. While the aforesaid writ petition continued to remain pending, by order dated 5.8.2002 the petitioner was informed that the verification of service records reveal his date of birth as 1.1.1935 and not 2.12.1944. He was further informed that he was due for retirement with effect from 1.1.1995. Consequently the petitioner was ordered to have retired with effect from 31.12.94. In the said order dated 5.8.2002, it was further recorded that the period of overstay of the petitioner would receive separate consideration of the University authorities. Aggrieved by the order dated 5.8.2002 the second writ petition i.e. W.P.(c) No.5287/2002 has been instituted.

(3.) The University authorities have filed separate affidavits in both the cases. According to the University, after the date of birth of the petitioner was corrected as 02. 12.1944, an objection in the course of audit was raised, regarding the authenticity of the school certificate on the basis of which the aforesaid correction was made. The matter was enquired into and also entrusted to the police for due investigation. However, as the school in question did not maintain any records of such certificates upto the year 1966, the matter could not be finalized. It is in these facts that the petitioner was sent for medical examination. As the opinion rendered was not very specific, the petitioner was sent for a second medical examination and the findings therein were again not conclusive. Thereafter, the authority by a visual comparison of the two certificates produced by the writ petitioner and having regard to the other facts, came to the conclusion that the correct date of birth would be 01.01.1935 and not 02.12.1944. Consequently, the impugned order dated 5.8.2002 was issued.