SYED NISAR HUSSAIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has been temporarily regularized as Junior Craft Instructor in terms of Govt. order No. 157-Ind of 1991 dated 21.0.1991. At the relevant time he was required to declare his date of birth which according to learned Counsel was declared as 6.9.1955, in support thereof school leaving certificate indicating the date of birth of the Petitioner as 6.9.1955 issued by the Government School, Rainawari Srinagar, had been produced, hut same has not been accepted; as a result thereof Petitioner obtained medical certificate issued by the Medical Superintendent, District Hospital Baramulla, where-under age of the Petitioner has been determined as 38 years as on 28.9,1991. This age too has not been accepted by the Respondents. Then an order bearing No. 456-HDT of 1993 dated 13.5.1993 has been issued which reads as under:

(2.) The contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the age of the Petitioner pursuant to order No. 456 dated 13.5.1993 has been determined whimsically. Such mariner of determination of age is not recognized by the service rules.

(3.) Article 35-AA of CSR prescribes mode and method of determining the age of the government employee. The modes prescribed therein have not been adopted at all. The response as has been tiled by the Respondents is indicative of the fact that the school leaving certificate was not produced at all. If at all taken to be correct, still the certificate is not free from suspicion as the date of birth of the Petitioner in the said certificate is recorded as 6.9.1955 and the Petitioner is shown to have read up to 5th primary on 1964, so within three years of his admission he could not reach to 5th primary, based on tins position the certificate has been ignored. Then medical certificate has been ignored by staling that the Medical Superintendent ought to have subjected the Petitioner to Radiological and Dental examination which has not been done.