UNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus MRS. SAROJ BALA

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 656 · Decided: 13-12-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
v. 
MRS. SAROJ BALA 
DECEMBER 13, 1995 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] 
Service Law : 
Date of Birth-Correction of-Application for-Filed after 18-1!2 
C 
years-~entral Administrative Tiibunal directed correction of date of 
bi1th-Held: It was unthinkable that having remained in service for 18 years 
the applicant discovered that her date of birth was wron15ln the circumstan-
ces of the case, the Tribunal was wholly unjustified in directing co"ection of 
date of birth. 
D 
The resJJonrlent had ap1icarcd for All India Civil Services Examina-
tion wherein she had annexed her school record in which her date of birth 
was recorded as AJJril 4, 1949. On the basis of the selection in the competi-
tive examination, she was selected for All India Revenue Service (Income· 
Tax). She aJJproached the University for correction of her date of birth to 
E be AJJril 5, 1950. 111e University had rejected the same. The respondent 
then filed an application for correction of the date of birth which was 
rejected by the Government. Thereafter, the resJJondent filed a petition in 
the Central Administrative Tribunal for correction of her date of birth. 
The Tribunal allowed the petition. Aggrieved by the Tribunal's judgment 
F 
the aJJpellants preferred the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1.1. The respondent's parents are not illiterate. She is well 
educated. She comJJeted in All India Civil Services Examination. Her date 
G of birth was registered in the University to be April 4, 1949. On that basis, 
she appeared for the examination aud she was selected. The said date has 
been entered in the service record and remained undisputed for 18-1/2 
years. [ 658-C] 
1.2. It is unthinkable that having been born in an educated family 
H and having remained in service for 18 years she discovered that her date 
656 
U.0.1. v. SAROJ BALA 
657 
of birth would be wrong. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal was A 
wholly unjustified and obviously illegal in allowing the application and 
directing correction of the date of birth. [658-D] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil appeal No. 12073 of 
1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 6.1.92 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in O.A. No. 1043-CH of 1991. 
K. Lahiri, P. Parmeshwaran, T.V. Ratnam and S.N. Terdol for the 
Appellants. 
R.S. Suri for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
B 
c 
D 
We have heard the counsel for both the parties. The respondent has 
appeared in the year 1971 for the All India Civil Services Examination 
wherein she had annexed her school record in which her date of birth was 
recorded as April 4, 1949. On the basis of the selection in the competitive 
examination, she was selected for All India Revenue Service (income· Tax) E 
in the year 1972 and she joined the service in the said year, On June 18, 
1985, she approached the University for correction of her date of birth to 
be April 5, 1950. The University by its proceedings dated October 13, 1986 
had rejected the same. The respondent then filed an application on 
February 5, 1991 for correction of the date of birth which was rejected by · 
the Government on April 4, 1991. Thereafter the respondent filed O.A. in 
the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh. By the impugned order 
dated 6.1.1992, the Tribunal held that the date of birth of the respondent 
is April 5, 1950 and directed correction of her date of birth in the service 
record within the time specified in the order. Thus this appeal by special 
leave. 
Shri R.S. Suri, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, 
contended that the birth certificate given by the Registrar do indicate that 
her date of birth is April 5, 1950 and that the mother had filed an affidavit 
F 
G 
in support thereof. It is also sought corroboration from the date of birth 
certificate of her elder sister and due to close proximity of six months H 
658 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A between the birth of two children, it would not be possible that the 
respondent would have been born. He also relied upon the horoscope to 
prove her date of birth. 
We are wholly unable to appreciate the stand of the respondent. The 
respondent's parents are not illiterate. She is a well educated one she 
B competed in All India Civil Services Examination. Her date of birth was 
registered in the University to be April 4, 1949. On that basis, she appe

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