Bombay High Court Allows Employee's Petition for Correction of Date of Birth in Service Records Based on Matriculation Certificate. Employer's Refusal Set Aside as Arbitrary When Employee Consistently Used Correct Date in Subsequent Examinations and Transfers.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Prabhat Kumar Titus, was appointed as a Badli Loader in Western Coalfields Limited in 1984. His date of birth was recorded as 1st July, 1961 in Form B, although his matriculation certificate showed 6th December, 1961. In 1992, when he cleared the Sirdar examination, his date of birth was correctly recorded as 6th December, 1961. Similarly, upon transfer to Umrer area and upon joining as Overman in 2008, the correct date was recorded. However, in 2021, the Colliery Manager issued a 'Reasoned Order' refusing to correct the date of birth in the service records, stating that the application was made after a long delay and that the date had been recorded long ago. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition. The Court considered the facts and found that the petitioner had consistently used the correct date of birth in all subsequent official documents and examinations. The Court held that the matriculation certificate is a reliable document and the employer's refusal was arbitrary and unjustified. The Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the respondents to correct the date of birth to 6th December, 1961 in all service records.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Correction of Date of Birth - Matriculation Certificate as Proof - The petitioner sought correction of his date of birth from 1st July, 1961 to 6th December, 1961 based on his matriculation certificate. The employer refused on the ground that the date was recorded long ago and the application was belated. The Court held that the matriculation certificate is a reliable document and the employer's refusal was arbitrary, especially when the petitioner had consistently used the correct date in subsequent examinations and transfers. (Paras 3-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the employer's refusal to correct the date of birth in service records based on the matriculation certificate was justified.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 2nd February, 2021 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to correct the date of birth of the petitioner as 6th December, 1961 in all service records within four weeks.

Law Points

  • Date of birth correction
  • service record
  • matriculation certificate
  • employer's refusal
  • writ petition
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (BOM) (06) 52

Writ Petition No. 1315 of 2021

2021-06-30

Sunil B. Shukre, Anil S. Kilor

M.M. Sudame for petitioner, A.M. Ghare for respondents

Prabhat Kumar Titus

Western Coalfields Limited and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the employer's refusal to correct date of birth in service records.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the 'Reasoned Order' dated 2nd February, 2021 and direction to correct date of birth to 6th December, 1961.

Filing Reason

The employer refused to correct the date of birth despite the petitioner's matriculation certificate showing the correct date.

Previous Decisions

The Colliery Manager issued a 'Reasoned Order' dated 2nd February, 2021 refusing the correction.

Issues

Whether the employer's refusal to correct the date of birth based on matriculation certificate was justified.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that his date of birth is 6th December, 1961 as per matriculation certificate and was recorded correctly in subsequent examinations and transfers. Respondents argued that the date was recorded long ago and the application was belated.

Ratio Decidendi

The matriculation certificate is a reliable document for determining date of birth. An employer cannot refuse correction arbitrarily when the employee has consistently used the correct date in subsequent official records.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner was appointed in the year 1984 as 'Badli Loader' in the respondent-WCL. Though, his date of birth in Matriculation Certificate reflects as 6th December, 1961, it was recorded as 1st July, 1961 in the Form 'B' maintained by the respondents. The petitioner had thereafter on 28th November, 1992 cleared an examination for the post of 'Sirdar' and at that point of time his date of birth was recorded as 6th December, 1961. The petitioner had cleared the examination for the post of 'Overman' on 3rd July, 2008 and while joining as 'Overman', his date of birth was recorded as 6th December, 1961.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the 'Reasoned Order' dated 2nd February, 2021 issued by the Colliery Manager refusing correction of date of birth. The petition was heard and disposed of on 30th June, 2021.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Arbitration Application Under Section 8 of Arbitration Act, 1996 — Dispute Referred to Arbitrator Despite Alleged Non-Signatory to Arbitration Agreement. Court holds that existence of arbitration agreement between parties i...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Employee's Petition for Correction of Date of Birth in Service Records Based on Matriculation Certificate. Employer's Refusal Set Aside as Arbitrary When Employee Consistently Used Correct Date in Subsequent Examinations and ...