STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. versus VALI MOHMED DOSABHAI SINDHI

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 685 · Decided: 19-07-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

·C 
A 
STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. 
v. 
V ALI MOHMED DOSABHAI SINDHI 
B 
JULY 19, 2006 
[ARIJJTPASAYAT AND LOKESHWARSINGH PANT A, JJ.] 
c 
Service Law: 
Bombay Civil Service Rules, 1959; Rule 171: 
Public Servant-Date of Birth--Correction in-Held: A claim for 
correction in date of birth in the service records of a public servant should D 
not be made/entertained belatedly-Courts/Tribunal should keep into 
consideration the interest of not only the public servant concerned but also 
the interest of juniors to the public servant while dealing with such application 
for correction-Court/Tribunal should refrain in issuing any direction unless 
a clear case on the basis of conclusive evidencelirrefi1table proof is made out 
within a reasonable time to its satisfaction-They must be slow in granting E 
an interim reliejlcontinuation in service unless prima facie evidence of 
unimpeachable character is produced in order to safeguard the interest of 
immediate junior to the public servant-It is not permissible to grant any 
change/correction in terms of specific provisions for correction of date of 
birth-Single Judge of the High Court erred in allowing correction and the F 
Division Bench in affirming it-Hence, impugned judgment cannot be 
sustained. 
Respondent, a Police Constable, had filed an application for making a 
correction in his date of birth in the service record. Since the prayer was not 
accepted by the authorities concerned, he had filed a writ petition before the G 
High Court. The incumbent was retired from service on reaching the age of 
superannuation. Later, the writ petition was allowed by the High Court 
directing the authorities for payment of arrears to the incumbent. The 
appellant-State preferred LPA which was dismissed by the High Court 
685 
H 
686 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A directing that all the salary benefits should be given to the employee, however, 
the arrears need not be paid to him. Hence the present appeal. 
Appellant-State contended that no reason was assigned by the 
respondent as to why he had made a request for change of his date of birth 
only after receiving the order of his retirement and as to why he remained 
B silent for nearly about 35 years while he was in service; that the entry in the 
service record was made on the basis of his own statement; that no materials 
were adduced to show that there was any error in the date of birth so recorded; 
and that on mere production of school leaving certificate, authenticity of which 
was doubtful, the High Court should not have granted a relief. 
c 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:l.l. Rule 171 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules clearly provides 
that the request made for alteration of date of birth should not be entertained 
after the preparation of the service book of the Government servant and in 
D any event not after the completion of the probation period or :.fter 5 years of 
continuous service whichever was earlier unless it is shown that the entry 
was due to want of care on the part of some person other than the individual 
in question or is an obvious clerical error. [689-D-E) 
1.2. Most of the States have framed statutory rules or in absence thereof 
E issued administrative instructions as to how a claim made by a public servant 
in respect of correction of his date of birth in the service record is to be 'dealt 
with and what procedure is to be followed. The sole object of such rules being 
that any such claim regarding correction of the date of birth should not be 
made or entertained after decades, especially on the eve of superannuation of 
F 
such public servant. [689-H; 690-A) 
State of Assam v. Dak.sha Prasad Deka, (1970) 3 SCC 624; Government 
of Andhra Pradesh v. M Hayagreev Sarma, [1990) 2 SCC 682; Executive 
Engineer, Bhadrak (R&B) Division, Orissa and Ors. v. Rangadhar Mal/ik, 
[1993] Supp. I SCC 763 and Union of India v. Harnam Singh, (199312 SCC 
G 162, relied on. 
1.3. An application for correction of the date of birth should not be dealt 
with by the Courts, Tribunal or the High Court keeping in view only the public 
servant concerned. Any such direction for correction of the date of birth of 
the public servant concerned has a chain reaction, inasmuch as others waiting 
H for years, below him for their respective promotions are affected in this 
.... 
STATE OF GUJARAT r. V ALI MOHMED OOSABHAI SINDHI 
687 
process. [691-D-EI 
2. Unless a clear case on the basis of materials which can b

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