BASHIR AHMAD HUSSAINI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY medium of this writ petition, the petitioner challenged his retirement from service on superannuation by the respondents. According to him, his date of birth is 11 -5 -1934 which stands entered in his Service Book. The respondents have, allegedly, fixed his date of birth as 11 -5 -1931 and ordered his retirement w.e.f. 31 -5 -1986.

(2.) IT is alleged in the writ petition that the petitioner passed his matriculation examination through the Punjabi University, Lahore in the year 1947. When he entered into the Government Service in the Forest Department, he showed his date of birth as 11 -5 -1934 which was, allegedly, recorded in his service book also. The D. F. O. concerned disputed his date of birth and referred it to the Chief Conservator of Forests, who in turn, referred it to his Administrative department. Finally, on 17 -12 -1986, he was ordered to be retired from service with effect from 31 -5 -1986, accepting his date of birth as 11 -5 -1931 and not 11 -5 -1934. Allegedly, he was not given any opportunity of being heard in the fixation of his date of birth and the order of retirement was passed arbitrarily. He made a representation against the said order to the Chief Conservator of Forests, who recommended his case to the Administrative department for reconsideration. The Government allowed the petitioner to continue in service on his own risk and responsibility, pending final decision about the case of his date of birth. In the meanwhile, the Government referred the matter to Government of India, Ministry of Education, New Delhi for authenticity of the claim of the petitioner about his date of birth, (needless to mention that after partition of the country, the result of Matriculation examination of the candidates who had appeared in the said examination in the year 1947, through Punjab University, Lahore was maintained by the Ministry of Education, New Delhi). From the said records, it was revealed that the date of birth of the petitioner was 31 -5 -1934, as is contained in Annexure "F" to the writ petition, which is the reply from the Ministry of Education, New Delhi.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the respondents should have revoked the order of his retirement on the basis of the date of birth conveyed to them by the Ministry of Education, New Delhi. As they have not done so, he has, therefore, prayed that the said order of retirement may be quashed and the respondents directed to release his pay dues.