RAJKUMAR SON OF SHRI PRAHLAD RAM (ACTUAL DATE OF BIRTH IS 8.2.1967), BY CASTE VALMIKI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, WARD NO. 22, TOWN UDAIPURWATI, DISTRICT JHUNJHUNU (RAJASTHAN) Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH THE DIRECTOR, LOCAL BODIES, GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN, DLB BUILDING, CIVIL LINES, NEAR INOX CINEMA, JAIPUR (RAJASTHAN)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was initially engaged as Safai karamchari on daily wage basis on 18.10.1984 and was appointed on regular basis on 1.1.1987 vide order dated 21.1.1987 and after his regular appointment, was called upon to furnish the relevant documentary evidence and particularly for the date of birth which could be recorded in the service roll and that becomes sacrosanct to be carried out for times to come in taking the decision of qualifying service and other benefits which the employee became entitled for the service he has rendered in the organization.

(2.) Indisputably, it is the own case of the petitioner that when service roll was prepared at the time when he was regularly appointed he furnished his horoscope on the basis of which 2.12.1956 was recorded as his date of birth duly attested and verified by the executive officer and it is not the case of the petitioner that he was not aware of the date of birth which was recorded in the service roll of the petitioner or what is mentioned in horoscope is factually incorrect but it appears that at later stage, the officer of the Municipal Board enquired into the matter and called from him some documentary evidence in support of his date of birth.

(3.) Notice was served to the petitioner dated 11.4.2000 and turn has taken place thereafter. The petitioner obtained transfer certificate from the School at Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu dated 19.4.2000 (Ann.4) indicating his date of birth recorded in school as 8.2.1967. One thing which can be further transpired from Ann.4 that he has joined Class I on 1.7.1975 and left on 30.4.1976 and throughout he remained absent and this court can certainly infer that this is the document obtained by the petitioner only for the purpose to support his date of birth recorded in school as 8.2.1967, even in support of date of birth nothing is on record on the basis of which his date of birth was recorded while took admission in Class I in the school in 1975.