R.K.Jangra
Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. [2009] INSC 528 (16 March 2009)
Judgment
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1615 OF
2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 2389 of 2008) R. K. Jangra ..........Appellant
Versus State of Punjab and Others ........Respondent ORDER H.L. Dattu,J.
Leave
granted.
1)This
appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No. 1333 of 2007 dated
29.1.2007. By the impugned order, the High Court has directed the appellant to
approach the civil court for correction of his date of birth in the service
records.
2)The
facts in brief are:- the appellant, R. K. Jangra, when he joined service as
Additional Design Engineer with respondent No.2 on 1 11.1.1980, he had produced
his Higher Secondary Part-I examination certificate dated 19.7.1969 as the
proof for his date of birth. In the said certificate his date of birth was
shown as 4.1.1952. The appellant within two years of his joining service, had
made an application for change of his date of birth from 4.1.1952 to 3.1.1953
before the Additional District Registrar, Births & Deaths, Jalandhar, by
stating that his mother was illiterate and she had given the wrong date of
birth while seeking his admission in the Primary School. The Additional
Registrar had obliged the appellant by issuing a birth certificate showing the
date of birth as 3.1.1953 vide his order dated 19.5.1981. The appellant armed with
the said certificate had made a representation before his employer for
correction of his date of birth in his service record.
3)Since
the request in the representation did not yield any result, the appellant once
again made a detailed representation to respondent No.2 for the same relief.
This representation was answered by respondent no. 2, by directing the
appellant to get the correction of date of birth done in the Matriculation
Certificate from the Registrar of Punjab University.
The
request made in this regard is rejected by the Registrar of Punjab University
by informing the appellant, that, the application filed is beyond the time
limit prescribed in the regulations of the University.
2 4)The
Government of Punjab by its order dated 21.6.1994 amended the Punjab Civil
Service Rules and in that had provided, that, employees who are already in the
service of Government of Punjab may apply for change of date of birth within a
period of 2 years from coming into force of the said Rules before the competent
authority. The request made pursuant to the aforesaid rules, is rejected by the
Registrar of Punjab University, by informing the appellant that the application
filed by him is beyond the time limit prescribed in the university regulations.
Not being satisfied with the endorsement so issued, the appellant once again by
his representation dated 20.9.1995, made a request before the State Government
for correction of his date of birth. The State Government vide its letter dated
18.12.1995 had rejected the claim of the appellant.
The
appellant again made several representation before various authorities. All
these authorities had asked appellant to furnish sufficient records/evidence to
act upon his request made in his representation. In spite of supplying all the
information asked, since no action was taken, the appellant filed a writ
petition before the Punjab High Court praying for issuance of a writ in the
nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to make appropriate correction of
his date of birth in the service records of the appellant.
3 5)The
High Court without going into the merits of the case rejected the petition by
its impugned order dated 29.1.2007. The High Court has observed:- "It will
be just and appropriate to relegate the appellant to avail his ordinary remedy
before a Civil Court. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is before us by
this special leave petition."
6)We have
heard learned counsel for the parties.
7)Appellant,
in spite of his attempts right from the year 1981, has failed to come out of
the perplexing web of the bureaucracy. Appellant who is due to retire in
January 2010 is praying for another extra year of service.
He has
made several representations in this regard without getting any results. At
this juncture he only wants his representation being considered in proper
perspective and in accordance with law and to give him one more year of
extension of service by making appropriate correction of his date of birth in
the service records.
8)In view
of the above discussion, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, we direct the
competent authority/Principal Secretary, Department of Irrigation, Punjab,
Chandigarh to consider the representation filed by the appellant on 8.5.1987,
in the light of 4 documents and material produced by him, within a month from
the date of this order, if the representation made by the appellant is
available with the respondent untrammeled by any of the observations made in
the earlier orders. If such representation is not available in their records, the
competent authority will call upon the appellant to file a fresh representation
with all the particulars required and consider the same within a reasonable
time.
9) In
view of the above discussion, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed
by the High Court is set aside. No order as to costs.
.......................................J. [TARUN CHATTERJEE]
.......................................J. [ H.L. DATTU ]
New Delhi,
March 16, 2009.
Back
Pages: 1 2 3
