High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
State of Punjab & Ors v. Harbhajan Singh - RSA-3789-2005  RD-P&H 894 (17 February 2006)
R.S.A. No. 3789 of 2005 (O&M)
Date of Decision: February 10, 2006
State of Punjab and others
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL.
Present:- Mr. D.S. Jandiala, Additional
Advocate General, Punjab,
for the appellants.
Mr. Manohar Dadwal, Advocate
for the Caveator.
VINEY MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
The defendants-State of Punjab and others having concurrently lost before both the Courts have approached this Court through the present Regular Second Appeal.
A suit for declaration was filed by the plaintiff claiming that he had joined the Education Department on January 13, 1982 wherein he had indicated his date of birth as June 10, 1955. Later on, it transpired that his correct date of birth as June 10, 1958. Accordingly, he made enquiries and even got a certificate from the Registrar of Deaths and Births. On the basis of the said date of birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Deaths and Births, he applied to the Punjab School Education Board for correction of his date of birth in his matriculation certificate.
After enquiring, the Punjab School Education Board corrected the date of birth in his matriculation certificate. Consequently, he applied to the Department for correction of the date of birth in his service record. The change was not made by the Department, and therefore, he filed the suit.
The learned trial Court decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff and held that matriculation certificate Ex.P.16 which has been revised by the School Education Board show that his date of birth has been corrected as June 10, 1958.
The date of birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Deaths and Birth also show that the date of birth of the plaintiff was June 10, 1958.
The matter was taken up in appeal by the defendants. The learned first Appellate Court reappraised the evidence and came to the similar conclusion as has been arrived at by the learned first Appellate Court.
Nothing has been shown that the findings recorded by both the Courts below suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to record.
No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal.
February 10, 2006 (VINEY MITTAL)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.