Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shri Ramdas Parab, was a government servant who entered service in 1967 as a Watchman. His date of birth was recorded as 10-3-1943 in his service book. He was promoted to Peon in 1969 and Driver in 1974. On 31-3-2001, he was retired on superannuation at the age of 58 years based on that date. Prior to retirement, on 15-10-1997, he applied for correction of his date of birth to 10-11-1948, claiming the original entry was wrong. He produced a birth certificate (Exh.PW1/M) showing birth on 10-11-1948 but registered on 5-6-1959, over a decade later. The department rejected his request, and he filed a suit for declaration and recovery of money. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove his correct date of birth and that the application was barred by Note 6 of Fundamental Rule 56, which requires correction within five years of entry into service. The plaintiff appealed. The High Court upheld the trial court's decision, noting that the birth certificate had little evidentiary value due to the delay in registration, and the plaintiff had not produced any school leaving certificate or other contemporaneous document. The court also held that the application was belated, as the plaintiff entered service in 1967 but applied only in 1997. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Correction of Date of Birth - Burden of Proof - The plaintiff, a government servant, sought correction of his recorded date of birth from 10-3-1943 to 10-11-1948. The court held that the burden was on the plaintiff to prove the correct date of birth. The birth certificate produced was registered more than a decade after birth and was not reliable. The plaintiff failed to discharge the burden. (Paras 4-7) B) Service Law - Fundamental Rule 56 - Note 6 - Limitation for Correction - Note 6 below Fundamental Rule 56 requires that any request for correction of date of birth must be made within five years of entry into government service. The plaintiff entered service in 1967 but applied for correction only in 1997, which was belated. The court upheld the trial court's finding that the application was time-barred. (Paras 7-8) C) Evidence - Birth Certificate - Evidentiary Value - A birth certificate registered after a delay of over a decade (birth in 1948, registration in 1959) has little evidentiary value, especially when the plaintiff had earlier declared a different date of birth at the time of entry into service. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to correction of his date of birth in the service record from 10-3-1943 to 10-11-1948, and whether the suit for declaration and recovery of money was maintainable.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree of the trial court dated 30-9-2004 are confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Burden of proof lies on employee to establish correct date of birth
- belated application for correction not maintainable
- birth certificate registered after decade has little evidentiary value
- Fundamental Rule 56 Note 6 requires correction within five years of entry into service
