Date Of Birth Recorded In Service Book Is Final If Employee Had Not Passed High School At Time Of Appointment: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that date of birth recorded in the service records shall deemed to be correct if the employee has not passed High School or equivalent exams.

Referring to Rule 2 of U.P. Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1974, Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery held

“Law in regard to determination of correct date of birth or age is well settled that provisions of Rule 2 of Rules 1974, shall be applicable that since at the time of entry into service, the petitioner has not passed High School or equivalent examination, therefore, date of birth recorded in service book at the time of entry shall be deemed to be correct date of birth.”

In 1988, petitioner was appointed on the post of Shramik at Harduaganj Thermal Power Plant, Kasimpur, Aligarh. Based on a medical examination, petitioner was said to be 20 years old and his date of birth was recorded as 19.10.1967. Accordingly, petitioner's date of retirement was calculated to be 31.10.2027.

Counsel for petitioner submitted that when petitioner was around 35 years of age, some inquiry regarding his age was conducted and his age was changed in the records using white ink. Petitioner procured some documents regarding the inquiry through RTI. Based on some transfer certificate his date of birth was determined as 14.04.1966 and therefore, his retirement date was changed to 30.04.2026.

Subsequently, petitioner was served with orders intimating his new date of retirement. These were challenged before the writ Court.

The Court observed that while the date of birth of 1967 was written properly, the date of 1966 was entered subsequently using white ink. Further, it noted that the date of 1966 was entered based on a Transfer certificate which is not a relevant document under the .P. Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1974 for determination of date of birth.

It further held that the decision to retire the petitioner early based on some inquiry could not have been taken behind petitioner's back. Noting that various documents consistently showed the same date of birth of the petitioner, the Court held that the petitioner could not have changed the date of birth to something which made him retire earlier.

In U.P. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad v. Raj Kumar Agnihotri, the Supreme Court while referring to the aforesaid rules had held that

“As per the existing rule, the date of birth or the age recorded in his service-book at the time of entry into the government service shall be deemed to be the correct date of birth or age, as the case may be, for all purposes and no application or representation shall be entertained for correction of such date or age in any circumstances whatsoever.”

Accordingly, the orders changing the date of retirement of the petitioner behind his back were set aside.

Case Title: Yatish Singh v. State of U.P. and 4 others

Click Here To Read/Download Order