Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

B.VARGHESE versus STATE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


B.VARGHESE v. STATE - OP No. 29974 of 1999(R) [2007] RD-KL 4470 (1 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 29974 of 1999(R)

1. B.VARGHESE
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.V.G.ARUN

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :01/03/2007

O R D E R

S. SIRI JAGAN, J.

O.P.NO. 29974 OF 1999

DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF MARCH, 2007



JUDGMENT

The petitioner was a District Superintendent of Police. He claims that his actual date of birth is 19.2.1945. However his school records showed his date of birth as 6.10.1944. This date of birth in the school records was entered in his service records also. The petitioner claims to have filed an application for correction of his date of birth on 28.11.86. However at that time, the school records continued to show his date of birth as 6.10.1944. He approached the authorities for the consideration of his application for correction of date of birth and this Court by Ext.P11 judgment directed the Government consider his application for correction of his date of birth afresh. The Government by Ext.P12 order, considered his application afresh in accordance with Ext.P11 judgment and rejected his claim on the ground of delay in apply. Going by G.O.(P)45/91/P&ARD dated 30.12.91, which required that the petitioner should have filed a proper application accompanied with the proof of the date of birth on or before 30.12.92. The Government found that the petitioner got his school records corrected only on 9.1.97 and submitted application for correction of date of birth O.P.29974/99 2 along with the corrected school record only on 21.2.97. The Government found that such an application was not in tune with the above said G.O. and on that ground rejected the application of the petitioner for correction of date of birth.

2. Accordingly the petitioner was also relieved from service since he was continuing even beyond the age of superannuation, going by his date of birth entered in his service records, by virtue of the direction in Ext.P11 judgment that the petitioner should be allowed to continue in service till orders are passed on his petition. Therefore he was relieved from duty pursuant to Ext.P13 teleprinter message dated, 26.11.99. The petitioner was to retire on 31.10.99, but continued till 26.11.99 on the basis of Ext.P11 judgment.

3. The petitioner challenges Exts.P12 and P13 on the ground that since the petitioner had submitted his application for correction of date of birth as early as in 23.11.1986, his application should not have been rejected on the ground of delay, although he could produce the corrected school records only after the period prescribed in the G.O.

4. The petitioner has no case that at any time before the issue of G.O.(P) No.45/91/P&ARD dated 30.12.91, the petitioner had submitted his corrected S.S.L.C. Book along with an application for correction of date of birth in the service records. That being so, what is applicable is the said G.O. for the purpose of consideration O.P.29974/99 3 of the petitioner's application for correction of date of birth. Since admittedly, the petitioner had got his date of birth corrected in the SSLC book only on 9.1.1997 and he bring the same before the Government for correction of his date of birth in the service record only on 21.2.97, which is not what is required as per the G.O., his application cannot be considered to be a proper application submitted in accordance with the above said G.O. That being so, I do not find any infirmity in Ext.P12 order and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

5. As I have already mentioned although as per his original date of birth in the school records the date of retirement of the petitioner was on 31.10.99, he continued till 26.11.99 by virtue of Ext.P11 judgment. Since he had been continuing by virtue of an order of this Court and doing work remuneration paid to him for the period subsequent to 31.10.99 shall not be recovered from the petitioner. However for the purpose of calculation of his retirement benefits, he would be deemed to have retired on his original date of superannuation namely 31.10.99. His pensionary benefits shall be calculated accordingly. With the above direction, the original petition is disposed of.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

Acd O.P.29974/99 4


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.