Supreme Court Awards Rs. 6 Lakh to Man Acquitted After 6 Years, Faults UP Police Probe  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Can Restore Power on 50% Deposit in Arbitrary Theft Assessments  ||  Supreme Court: Cooperative Society Cannot Deny RTI Records as Personal if Registrar Can Access Them  ||  SC: CoC Cannot Withdraw Approved Resolution Plan Over Improved Corporate Debtor Finances  ||  Delhi High Court: 24-Week Limit Alone Cannot Restrict Medical Termination of Pregnancy  ||  Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge to 18% GST on Online Legal Database Services  ||  Madras High Court: FIR Registration Does Not Decide Guilt; Prior Hearing of Accused Not Required  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Speedy Prosecution Sanction Process in Sabarimala Gold Theft Case  ||  Allahabad HC: Missing RT-PCR Report Cannot Bar COVID-19 Compensation if Records Confirm Infection  ||  MP High Court Directs Indore Police to Deploy Volunteers for Reporting Noise Pollution Violations    

Gajanan Badansing Rabde vs. The Chief Administrative Officer - (High Court of Bombay) (30 May 2023)

Employee cannot approach the employer at the fag end of his employment seeking a change in the date of birth

MANU/MH/1950/2023

Service

The Petitioner who is in employment of the respondents - Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran has approached present Court at the fag end of his service tenure praying for change of his date of birth in the service record from 4 June, 1965 to 26 August, 1966.

The Petitioner has filed the present petition after delay of almost 33 years, even assuming that an application was made by the Petitioner on 7 May, 1990 for change of his date of birth on the basis of domicile certificate. The Petitioner did not take any steps to pursue such application for such inordinately long period of almost 33 years. It appears that on the eve of his retirement, the petitioner has woken up from deep slumber and reapplied for correction of the date of birth in the service record, by his application dated 24 February, 2023. A person cannot be permitted to sleep over his rights. In these circumstances, only on the ground of delay and latches, the petition ought not to be entertained.

The Respondents have seriously disputed the Petitioner making an application dated 7 May 1990 for change of date of birth on the basis of domicile certificate. Such document is not on record of the Respondents, which itself is a disputed question of fact, which certainly cannot be gone into in the exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Thus, once the case of the Petitioner on the basis of his representation / application dated 7 May 1990 cannot be accepted, then the Petitioner's case is merely on the fresh application filed by the petitioner on 24 February 2023, on the basis of which the Petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court to seek change in the date of birth after having joined services with Respondents on 4 January 1990. Such course of action is certainly not available to the Petitioner.

It is a settled position in law that, the employee cannot approach the employer at the fag end of his employment seeking a change in the date of birth. Petition dismissed.

Tags : DOB   CHANGE   ENTITLEMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved