PREM SINGH Vs. S D O DANSAL (JAMMU)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Village Level Worker at present attached to Janjar Kotli Panchayat. He has been ordered to be retired from service with effect from 2 -8 -1973. The operation of the retirement order, however, was stayed by this court at the time of admitting this writ petition. The petitioner challenges the validity of the retirement order on the ground that he had not completed 55 years of age. The relevant facts leading to the present petition are as follows: -

(2.) THE petitioner started service in the Jammu and Kashmir State Fences on 2 -8 -1943. He was discharged from that service on 3 -1 -1953 and was appointed as a Village Level Worker on temporary basis on 7 -11 -2009 (Bikrami) corresponding to 19 -2 -1953. At the time of the entry in service as Village Level Worker the certificate of his discharge from the army was not produced by him before the competent authority, with the result that no entry about his date of birth could be made in the service book at that time. Subsequently, it is stated by respondent No. 2 in his affidavit that the Petitionerâ„¢s age as per entry in the discharge certificate was entered as 37 years on 2 -8 -1955. The original entry in the service book regarding the date of birth of the petitioner was made by the Block Development Officer, Chenani.

(3.) SOME time before 22 -5 -1973 the petitioner made a representation to respondent No. 1 that the date of birth as entered in the service book was not correct and the same may be corrected. He pleaded that his correct date of birth was 28 -9 -1928. This application of the petitioner appears to have been forwarded by the Block Development Officer to the Assistant Commissioner Agriculture Production vide his letter No. Est/ 252 dated 18 -5 -1973. The respondent No. 2 vide his letter No. 1037 -38 dated 22 -5 -1973 wrote to the Block Development Officer, respondent No. 1, that the petitionerâ„¢s date of superannuation according to the entry made in the service book which entry itself is based on the entry made in the discharge certificate of the petitioner was 28 -9 -1973 as the petitionerâ„¢s date of birth mentioned in his service book was 2 -8 -1918. Respondent No. 2 further observed that the question of correction of the date of birth of the petitioner could be considered on the production of the schoo1 leaving certificate or discharge certificate. After the receipt of this letter respondent No. 1 appears to have asked the petitioner to produce a school leaving certificate. The petitioner thereafter produced the school leaving certificate issued by the Head Master Public School, Jammu, wherein the petitionerâ„¢s date of birth was mentioned as 28 -9 -1928. Respondent No. 1 then forwarded the matter again to respondent No. 2 vide his letter No. Est/436 dated 8 -7 -1973. The original letter is not on the record but the same has been alluded to in the letter of the second respondent bearing No. 1973 dated 14 -7 -1973 addressed to the first respondent. In this letter the second respondent asked the first respondent to make necessary correction in the date of birth mentioned in the service book of the petitioner. The service book was also enclosed with this letter. A reading of this letter suggests that the second respondent admitted the correctness of the entry regarding the petitionerâ„¢s date of birth in the school leaving certificate and agreed to the suggestion made by the first respondent that the petitionerâ„¢s date of birth may be corrected consistently with the entry made in the school leaving certificate. After the receipt of this letter and the service book the first respondent crossed the original entry in the service book and made another entry instead and vide his letter No. Est/Misc/73/459 dated 20 -7 -1973 wrote to the second respondent to attest the fresh entry made by him as according to him the original entry had been made by the B. D. O. Chenani. It appears that instead of attesting the fresh entry made by the first respondent the petitioner was ordered to be retired from service. Annexure ËœEâ„¢ being letter No. Estt/692 -94 dated 17 -9 -1973 reads below : -