PRITHIVINATH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. KamaL Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Thakur, learned State counsel for the respondents.

(2.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents to correct the entry relating to the date of birth of the petitioner as 6.10.42 instead of 1.7.42 in the Service Book and thereby to allow the petitioner to superannuate on 31.10.2000 in place of 30.6.2000.

(3.) The brief facts leading to filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner joined the Assam Police Battalion as Constable on 13.2.68 and thereafter the petitioner was promoted to the successive posts and ultimately at the time of filing of this writ petition he was serving as Quarter Master Inspector (QMI) in the 4th Assam Police Battalion and was posted at its Head Quarter at Kahilipara, Guwahati. It is categorically stated that at the time of enrolment he produced his original pass certificate of HSLC as proof of his date of birth which was duly recorded in the Service Sheet as 6.10.42. On 2 5.3.7 8 a fire broke out in the Head Quarter of the said Battalion at Santilla, NC Hills and as a result of the said incident, all the materials of the unit including the service record of the petitioner along with other police personnel were completely destroyed. In consequence thereof, the Commandant of the Battalion vide communication dated 4.11.78 directed to reconstruct the record and the petitioner was also asked to submit all the materials for the purpose of reconstruction of his service book including HSLC pass certificate and intermediate pass certificate and in response to such direction the petitioner submitted all those documents including HSLC certificate as proof of his age and ultimately his date of birth was correctly recorded in the service sheet in his presence as 6.10.42. Despite such recording of date of birth by which the petitioner ought to have superannuated on 31.10.2000, to the utter surprise of the petitioner, the competent authority i.e. respondent No.6 vide impugned order dated 7.7.2000 ordered that in pursuance of communication dated 7.7.2000 issued by the respondent No.3, the petitioner was retired from police service on 30.6.2000 on attaining the age of 58 years of age. Hence, this writ petition.