SC: Clarificatory Statement Does Not Constitute a Binding Undertaking for Contempt Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Litigant Cannot be Worse Off for Filing an Appeal under ‘No Reformatio in Peius’  ||  Orissa HC: Article 22(1) Arrest Rights Pre-Exist, Written Grounds Ruling Not Prospective  ||  Kerala HC: Kissing a Child’s Penis Constitutes Penetrative Sexual Assault under POCSO  ||  Madras HC: Married Daughter Cannot be Denied Compassionate Appointment Solely for Her Marriage  ||  Bombay High Court: Child Welfare Prevails as ‘Joint Parenting’ is Not Recognised in Indian Law  ||  Kerala HC: Minor’s Consent or Relationship with Accused Holds No Relevance under POCSO Act  ||  Bombay HC: Failure to Prove Exact Quantum of Loss Does Not Bar Compensation  ||  CCPA Fines Dial4Trade Rs. 10 Lakh for Online Ammonium Nitrate Listing Featuring Blast Images  ||  Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order    

Ramchandra Baburao Tadge vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Ors - (High Court of Bombay) (14 May 2024)

Applications for change of date of birth at the fag end of service cannot be entertained

MANU/MH/3321/2024

Service

Petitioner has filed present petition challenging the Judgment and Order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dismissing Original Application filed by him seeking alteration of his date of birth in the service book. Petitioner prays that, his date of birth recorded in the service book as '1 June 1964' be changed to '21 March 1966'. The Tribunal has proceeded to dismiss the Original Application holding that the same could not be entertained at the fag end of his service as he is due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31stMay, 2024.

Though Petitioner may have made representation for change of date of birth on 2 February 1995 and went on making various representations thereafter, the fact remains that he approached the Tribunal for the first time in February 2024 when he was due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31 May 2024. Thus, despite being appointed in service in the year 1994, Petitioner thought of approaching the Tribunal with his grievance relating to change of his date of birth 30 years later in February 2024. The approach to the Tribunal was made 3 months before retirement.

The Apex Court has repeatedly frowned upon the tendency of Government servants in approaching the Courts at the fag end of their service for change of date of birth. The Tribunal, while dismissing Petitioner's Original Application has relied upon judgment of this Court in State of Maharashtra vs. Sudhir Bhagwat Kalekar. The Apex Court has time and again held that, applications for change of date of birth at the fag end of service cannot be entertained.

There is no reason to take a different view in the present case than the one taken in Sudhir Bhagwat Kalekar. The Tribunal has rightly dismissed the Original Application fled by the Petitioner. The order passed by the Tribunal to be unexceptionable. Petition dismissed.

Tags : ALTERATION   DATE OF BIRTH   ELIGIBILITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved