words per minute
9
Arjun_Biswas
00:00
Speed
It is settled proposition of law that the date of birth entered in the service-record cannot be corrected at a belated stage. Where the date of birth remains in existence for a long time, the same does not require to be disturbed on any ground whatsoever. The onus is on the employee-applicant to prove about the wrong recording of his date of birth in his service record by adducing irrefutable evidence. The Court has to insist for clear, clinching and unimpeachable evidence in this regard, because the relief sought by an employee may entail chain reaction hampering promotional prospects of junior officers and may cause an irreparable injury to them.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that while examining the issue of correction of date of birth, the Court must be very slow in accepting the case of applicant if issue has been agitated at a much belated stage and it must examine the pros and cons involved in the case even if not raised by the parties. In the said case, the Tribunal had allowed application for correcting the date of birth placing reliance on the Horoscope and a certificate issued by the retired Head Master of the School showing a different date of birth. The Apex Court reversed the said judgment observing that if it was allowed, the applicant would have joined the service when he was less than 18 years of age and, therefore, accepting such an application would amount to sanctifying his illegal entrance in service. The Court further observed that no reliance could be placed upon the said certificate and Horoscope at all.
In State of Punjab vs. Mohinder Singh, AIR 2005 SC 1868, the Supreme Court held that horoscope is a very weak piece of material to prove age of a person. A very heavy onus lies on the person, who wants to press it into service and to prove its authenticity. It requires to be proved in terms of Section 32(5) of the Evidence Act by examining the person having special means of knowledge and in that context, horoscopes have been held to be inadmissible for proof of age. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the court must be very vigilant in placing reliance on a document or certificate of date of birth, which had been brought into existence for the benefit of the pending proceedings as the correctness and genuineness of such a certificate is not free doubt and the same might have been obtained for getting the relief by such an applicant. The date of birth as recorded in the service book as declared by an officer in the application for recruitment has to be accepted as correct by the Central Government and this can be altered only if under sub-rule of the Rules 1988, it is established that a bona fide clerical mistake had been committed in accepting the date of birth and once an application has been rejected, it would be a case that there was no bona fide clerical mistake which had been committed.
For daily Court matter, rate the text.