Chaya Sureshrao Niwane vs Deputy Director Of Education And Others

M.S. Jawalkar, J

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the parties.

The petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission at the request and by consent of the parties.

The present petition is filed being aggrieved by the communication dated 25/05/2023 thereby denying the request made by the petitioner for change in date of birth in service record for the reason of delay in submitting the same.

The husband of the petitioner was working at the respondent no.3 School who died on 08/02/2010 during his service. As such, petitioner made a request for grant of compassionate appointment. The respondent No.2, Education Officer by way of communication dated 20/03/2015 granted permission to appoint the petitioner on compassionate basis and vide order dated 30/03/2015, the applicant came to be appointed on the post of peon/Junior Clerk.

On 09/12/2015, the approval was granted to the appointment of the petitioner by the respondent No.2. Later on, the said approval was continued after confirmation of the petitioner on 01/04/2018. As per the birth certificate issued by Akola Municipal Corporation and the Aadhar Card, the date of birth of petitioner is 23/01/1965. In the year 2021, for the first time the applicant came to know that erroneous date of birth in her service book is recorded as 03/07/1963 when in fact the same is 23/01/1965. As such, the petitioner preferred necessary representation to the respondent No.3 school on 09/03/2021. The request of the petitioner was pending before respondent no. 1 and 2 and proposals were duly submitted for change in date of birth, the petitioner was superannuated from service on 31/07/2021, thereby treating her date of appointment as 03/07/1963. The respondent No.2 by way of communication dated 09/05/2022 forwarded the said proposal to the office of respondent No.1. The said proposal was refused on the count of delay in filing the proposal, hence the applicant is challenging the communication dated 25/05/2023.

It is not disputed that in view of the Government Circular dated 03/03/1998, such correction ought to be applied for within a period of 5 years of joining of the service. Whereas, in the present matter, the petitioner has applied for the correction of her date of birth on 09/03/2021 as her date of appointment is 30/03/2015. Thus she has applied after 5 years of her service which cannot be taken into consideration.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader drawn our attention in Prabhakar Yashwant Salve Vs. Chief Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd., Pune and others, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine Bom. 4701, wherein Principle Seat of this Court held that the request for change of the date of birth in the service record at the fag end of service is not sustainable. The Court considered a number of judgments and observed that the grievance as to the date of birth in the service record should not be permitted at the fag end of the service career. The Court also held that even if there is good evidence to establish that the recorded date of birth is erroneous, the correction cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

As such, the order passed by the respondent No.2-Education Officer is appropriate which needs no interference. Accordingly, the prayer made by the petitioner is hereby rejected. The petition stands dismissed.

Rule made discharged in above terms. No costs.