RAJ PAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the averments made in this writ petition, the petitioner joined the service of the respondent-Department as Clerk on 3.8.1988. At the time of joining service, his date of birth was entered in the service record as 12.5.1961 on the basis of matriculation certificate submitted by him. It is the case of the petitioner that in the year 2003, it came to his knowledge hat his date of birth was 18.3.1963 instead of 12.5.1961. On coming to know about this fact, he applied for issuance of a birth certificate from the Chief Medical Officer, Ambala, who issued the birth certificate dated 3.7.2003 confirming the date of birth of the petitioner as 18.3.1963. It is the further case of the petitioner that after obtaining date of birth certificate (Annexure P-1), he approached respondent No.3 to get his date of birth corrected in his service record from 12.5.1961 to 18.3.1963. Respondent No.3 forwarded the request of the petitioner to respondent No.2 who rejected the request of the petitioner for correction in the date of birth vide order dated 24.12.2003 (Annexure P-3) on the ground that no application for change of date of birth beyond 2 years from the date of joining can be entertained.

(2.) As per the further averments, the petitioner also filed a suit for declaration to get his date of birth corrected in matriculation certificate. The said suit was dismissed vide judgment dated 16.9.2006 (Annexure P- 6). However, appeal filed by the petitioner against the said judgment was accepted by the District Judge, Yamuna Nagar vide judgment dated 8.3.2008 and respondent No.4 (Board of School Education Haryana) was directed to carry out the necessary correction in their record and on the matriculation certificate issued to the petitioner. Respondent No.4 (Board of School Education Haryana) carried out the necessary correction and issued a fresh matriculation certificate to the petitioner. Thereafter, he approached respondent No.2 vide representation dated 20.5.2008 for correction of his date of birth in service record on the basis of correction being carried out in his matriculation certificate. However, the date of birth of the petitioner continued to be shown as 12.5.1961. Ultimately, respondent No.2 vide order dated 23.7.2010 (Annexure P-16) without affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and also without conducting any inquiry as to ascertain the correct age of the petitioner, rejected the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner once again requested respondent No.2 to correct his date of birth and the said request was again rejected vide order dated 20.12.2011 (Annexure P-18).

(3.) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders dated 24.12.2003 (Annexure P-3), 23.7.2010 (Annexure P-16) and 20.12.2011 (Annexure P-18) on the ground that before passing the said order, respondent No.2 has failed to conduct any inquiry as provided under the Government notification dated 13.8.2001 to determine the correct age of the petitioner.