RAM NARAYAN JOSHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, while stating his date of birth as 10. 02. 1940, entered the government service as Patwari on 15. 03. 1963 but continued till 01. 05. 2001 when the Collector Chittorgarh terminated his service after noticing that his date of birth was unauthorisedly changed in the service record to 10. 02. 1944, has preferred the instant petition for writ assailing the order passed by the Collector, Chittorgarh in departmental proceedings on 25. 05. 2002 (Annex. 9) directing adjustment of the amount unauthorisedly received by the petitioner beyond the age of superannuation, from 01. 03. 1998 to 01. 05. 2001; and that passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur on 29. 06. 2004 (Annex. 13) rejecting his appeal.

(2.) FACTUAL matrix relevant for the present petition, as available from the material placed on record and more or less of undenied and undeniable facts, could be taken into comprehension thus: The petitioner entered into the services on being appointed as Patwai on 15th March 1963 stating his date of birth as 10th February 1940. The petitioner, while submitting his Annual Performance Appraisal Reports ('apars') until the year 1982 continued to state his date of birth as "10. 02. 1940". However, in the APARs from the year 1983-84 onwards, the date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as "10. 02. 1944". Copies of relevant parts of some APARs upto the year 1980-81 have been placed on record by the respondents as Annexure-R/1; and a copy of the relevant part of the APAR for the year 1983-84 has been placed on record as Annexure-R/2. The respondents have also pointed out that after joining services, in his first declaration for State Insurance, the petitioner stated his date of birth specifically as 10th February 1940 (Annexure-R/3 ). It may be pointed out that in accord with such date of birth at 10. 02. 1940 as entered in the service record and continued till the year 1981-82, the petitioner was to reach the age of superannuation of 58 years on 10. 02. 1998; and thus, was to retire on the last day of the month of February 1998. However, for the date of birth having been changed to 10. 02. 1944, the petitioner continued in service beyond the month of February 1998.

(3.) THE Collector, however, having regard to the circumstances of the case and the reply submitted by the petitioner, and after hearing him, found that the matter was of serious concern as the date of birth of the petitioner had been altered in the service record though it was continuously maintained until the year 1983 as 10. 02. 1940; and the alteration in the figures and so also insertion of the words came up later on. THE learned Collector proceeded to pass the order on 01. 05. 2001 (Annex. 7) appointing the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nimbahera to enquire into the matter thoroughly and to ascertain the persons guilty in the matter; and at the same time ordered that the petitioner be immediately retired from service; that the departmental proceedings shall be decided on merits finally after receipt of the inquiry report; and till then, no payment be made to the petitioner towards gratuity and if he be found entitled to pension, then provisional pension be accorded taking his date of birth as 10. 02. 1940.