BHUPAL PRASAD SINGH v. BIHAR UNIVERSITY , Muzaffarpur

university on completion of 44 years of service was challenged by an aggrieved employee, namely, Ganesh Sinha in C.W.J.C. No. 11890 of 2005 which has been decided against the writ petitioner. In that case, the date given in the Matriculation Certificate was not relied upon for the reason that the petitioner had passed Matriculation Examination while continuing in service of the college and the date of birth was given by the petitioner during continuation of service. It has been held in this decision that since the petitioner passed Matriculation Examination subsequently while continuing in service, as such, date of birth given in the Matriculation Certificate cannot be made basis for computing his age. When the service book is opened in the middle of career and qualification of Matriculation is also obtained during the service career. On the basis of own disclosure of employee regarding date of birth after entry in 8 service, no weight can be attached to such documents. In the case of the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 11890 of 2005, date of birth was furnished at the time of entry in service, on the basis of Matriculation Certificate and service book was opened, later on, after 40 years of his entry in service. In the present case, the petitioner has not admitted that he joined service in the year, 1962 and tried to mislead the university as well as this court by giving a wrong date of appointment in the year, 1976. The documents which have been mentioned in the counter affidavit specially the acquittance roll and information supplied by the Rajendra College, Chapra where the petitioner was originally appointed, it is obvious that the petitioner joined his service in the year, 1962. 1976 is the year when the petitioner was appointed on promotion from Class-IV post to the post of assistant. It is not his initial date of appointment. Since the petitioner joined his service in the year, 1962 and his date of birth is accepted as 01.01.1954, it means that he joined service at the 8 years of age. This cannot be accepted as on that date, he joined service, presumption will be that he must have been 18 years of age. Subsequently, in the year, 1971, he passed matriculation examination and there on his on disclosure, he gave his date of birth as 01.01.1954. No relevance can be attached to this date of birth, because it is a date of birth which was furnished by the petitioner in continuation of the service. As per the Government Circular, no 9 non-teaching employee in service of the college/university can remain in service for more than 44 years counting of 44 years of service in case of petitioner will start w.e.f. 1962, that is the date when he gave his joining in class-IV post at Rajendra College, Chapra. The Circular which is challenged in the present writ application has already been held legal in C.W.J.C. No. 11890/05. Considering all these facts and the discussion made in C.W.J.C. No. 11890/05 which is equally applicable in the case of petitioner, I do not find any merit in this case. This writ application is dismissed. However, the direction regarding recovery of emoluments cannot be upheld as the petitioner rightly or wrongly worked till the date on 30.03.2009 i.e. the date of issuance of impugned order. The petitioner would be entitled for payment of salary and allowance till 30.3.2009 admittedly he worked on the post in the college till that date. akv/ ( Mridula Mishra, J )