SAHIB SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT came to this Court with a plea that he joined the State police department as a Constable in the year 1963. His date of birth was recorded as 23rd June41. He stated that he came to know that his actual date of birth is 8th July,44. This fact, he came to know in the year 1982 when he was promoted to the post of Sub -Inspector. Thereafter, he filed representations also. As these representations were not being considered, he preferred a writ petition bearing SWP No. 1533/96. This writ petition came to be decided on 10th Feb99 directing the respondent State to decide the disputed question of fact. Thereafter the matter was considered by the respondents and an order was passed on 17th April99. The date of birth of the appellant as originally recorded i.e. 23rd June41 was sustained. He challenged this order in a writ petition. This writ petition stands dismissed. Now an appeal has been preferred under Clause 12 of Letters Patent.

(2.) A learned Single Judge of this Court while dismissing the writ petition upheld the order passed by the competent authority on the plea that after inordinate delay, the competent authority was not required to go into the question as to whether the date of birth was rightly recorded or not.

(3.) THE order which has been passed by the Inspector General of Police has been placed on the record as Annexure D. Para 1 of this order takes note of the fact that earlier a writ petition was preferred and that was disposed of on 10th Feb99. Para 2 of the order makes recital of the fact that in terms of the decision given by this Court, the matter has been examined. Para 3 makes mention of the fact that appellant was summoned and he was given oportunity to produce relevant evidence. The fact that he placed on record the school leaving certificate and the discharge certificate issued by the Government Higher Secondary School Pallanwala and Khalsa High School, Srinagar, has been adverted to. Thereafter in para 4 of the order, it is mentioned that the case of the appellant was examined minutely. Reference has been to a decision given by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Burn Standard Co. Ltd. v. Dina Bandu Majumdar. Ultimately it has been concluded that "the dispute has been raised at the verge of his supperannuation which cannot be accepted in view of the pronouncements made by their Lordships of the Apex Court...."