NOMAL BHUYAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Upon hearing the learned counsel on both sides, it appears to me that the writ petitioner, Shri Nomal Ch. Bhuyan made a prayer in this writ petition for a direction to the respondents to recall or cancel the impugned memo/orders dated 7.1.93 issued by the Asstt. Inspector General of Police (T), Assam, Guwahati treating the day of retirement of the writ petitioner as on 30.6.94 as in Annexure III to the writ petition, the order dated 5.5.93 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Kokrajhar, deciding the date of retirement of the writ petitioner as on 30.6.94 as in Annexure IV and also the order dated 29.6.93 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Kokrajhar allowing the writ petitioner to go on superannuation pension w.e.f.' 1.7.94 FN as in Annexure V to the writ petition by contending inter alia that the writ petitioner was initially appointed as Constable in the Assam Police Battalion on 1.1.95, that the petitioner was later on promoted as Armed Brancdi Sub- Inspector and subsequently be was confirmed in the aforesaid post w.e.f. 10.7.79 and thereafter, he was again promoted to the post of Armed Branch Inspector w.e.f. 30.6.87 and at the relevant time he was as Armed Branch Inspector at Kokrajhar.

(2.) According to the writ petitioner, his date of birth was recorded as 1939 in the related Service Record/Sheet. The factum of the correct date of birth is supported by the documents namely the office letter bearing No. PNB/R/88/209 dated 19.1.88 as in Annesure I issued by the Superintendent of Police, Nalbari to the effect that the date of birth of the writ petitioner falls on/in the year 1939. The; said Superintendent of Police, Nalbari, further furnished the service particular of the writ petitioner showing the factum of his date of birth in the year 1939 which was made and highlighted long back in the year 1988. However, the writ petitioner received a copy of the office letter/order dated 7.1.93 bearing Memo No. TAP/C/116/Pt-V/278 issued by the Asstt. Inspector General of Police, the respondent No. 3 herein to the effect that his date of retirement falls on 30.6.94 and subsequently, another order of 5.5.93 as in Annexure IV was issued by the Superintendent of Police, Kokrajhar the respondent No. 4 herein to the effect that the date of retirement of the writ petitioner falls on 30.6.94 and lastly, the petitioner has been allowed to go on superannuation pension w.e.f. 1.7.94 A.N. vide order dated 29.6.93 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Kokrajhar, the respondent No. 4 herein as in Annexure- V to the writ petition to the prejudice of the writ petitioner.

(3.) It is also the case of the writ petitioner that the respondents did not make any inquiry as required by SR 8 and did not give the petitioner any opportunity of being heard before altering his date of birth, thus denying him the equal protection of law in complete violation of the petitioners fundamental Rights as granted under. Articje 14 of the Constitution of India. The writ-pettioner went on to contend that, the impugned-orders of 7.1.93, 5.5.93 and also the order dated 26.6.93 as in Annexures III, IV and V are Violative of the principles of natural justice and that the same are liable to be set aside and quashed as the respondents acted arbitrarily, illegally, unreasonably and whimsically in altering the date of birth of the writ petitioner merely on the assumption of the fact that he joined the services on 1.1.55 and his age on that date was 19 years without making any proper enquiry as required under the law. Being aggrieved by the action of the respondents, the writ petitioner approached this Court with this writ petition.