GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR. versus M. HAYAGREEV SARMA

Citation: [1990] 2 S.C.R. 366 · Decided: 06-04-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.N. SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR. 
v. 
M.HAYAGREEVSARMA 
APRIL 6, 1990 
[K.N. SINGH AND N.M. KASLIWAL, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Recording and alteration 
of date of birth) Rules, 1984: Rules 4 and 5-0bject and validity of. 
Service Law-Employee-Service Record-Date of Birth recor-
ded on the basis of S.S.L.C. Certificate-Application for alteration of 
date of birth-Rejection of-Fresh consideration of alteration of date of 
birth after the enforcement of 1984 Rules-Permissibility of, 
.) 
--.,,,, 
w 
. 
!
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 254--Repugnancy-Vllth 
Schedule-List JI-State Law, Andhra Pradesh Public Employment 
_ ti
(Recording and alteration of date of birth) Rules 1984, Rule 5~~
Incidental trenching upon Union Law referable to List 1, Births, Deatfu 
.-
and Marriages Registration Act, 1886, Section 9-Effect of-Held Rule 
5 and Section 9 operate in different areas-No repugnancy. 
The respondent joined service in the Department of Examiner of 
E 
Accounts, Local Fund and in the service book bis date of birth was 
recorded on the basis of S.S.L.C. Certificate. He made an application 
for alteration of his date of birth but the Head of Department rejected __ _.,/ 
his prayer by an order dated 5.1.1968. After the coming into force of 
the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Recording and alteration of 
date of birth) Rules, . 1984, he made another application for alteration 
F 
of his date of birth which was also rejected by the Head of Department 
G 
on the ground of limitation. 
1 
The respondent filed a petition before the Andhra Pradesh 
Administrative Tribunal challenging the order rejecting his application J.:. 
and also the Constitutional validity of Rules 4 and 5 of the 1984 Rules. 
The tribunal by its order dated 18th October, 1985 directed the 
appellants to consider the respondent's application for the alteration of 
his date of birth on the basis of the extracts of the entry in the births and 
deaths register, holding that the respondent's application was wrongly 
rejected by the Head of Department on the ground of limitation; and (ii) 
1-f 
Rnle 5 of the 1984 Rules was void as it was repugnant to Section 9 of the 
366 
GOVT. OF A.P. v. M.H. SARMA 
367 
Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, 1886. 
In the appeal it was contended on behalf of the. State that (i) since 
the respondent's application for alteration of his date of birth had been 
rejected in 1968 he was not entitled to maintain any fresh application; 
and (ii) there was no repugnancy between Rule 5 of 1984 Rules and 
A 
section 9 of the 1886 Act. 
B 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of the Tribunal, 
/ 
the Court, 
HELD: I. Rule 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment 
(Recording and alteration of date of birth) Rules, 1984 lays down a 
salutory principle prohibiting re-opening of the question of correction 
of date of birth which may have become final prior to the enforcement 
of 1984 Rules. Since the question of alteration of the respondent's dale 
c 
of birth had been made on the basis of the School Certificate and his 
application for alteration had already been rejected in 1968, he was not 
entitled to claim alteration of his date of birth after the enforcement of o 
1984 Rules. It was not open to the respondent to claim alteration of his 
date of birth, even on the basis of extracts of the entry contained in 
births and deaths register maintained under the Births, Deaths and 
Marriages Registration Act, 1886 as the question of correction of his 
date of birth had already been finally decided in 1968. [372C-D] 
~ 
E 
2. Rule 5 lays down that where application of a Government emp-
loyee for alteration of his date of birth was pending on the date of the 
commencement of the 1984 Rules the same will be dealt with on the 
basis of date of birth recorded in the School and College records at the 
time of the entry of the employ~e in service. Thus if on the date of entry 
in service the date of birth of an employee was recorded in his service 
F 
book on the basis of his age as recorded in the School and College 
Certificate, in that event the date sii recorded shall be treated to be 
correct date of birth. However, if the date of birth recorded in the 
service book at the time of entry of the employee is not based on School 
or College records, Rule 5 does not operate as a bar against considera-
tion of other relevant materials in determining the date of birth of the 
:.; 
employee. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.