Recently, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sanyasi Rao v. High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Rep' by its Regislrart had an occasion of deating

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High court mav be preased to direct the Respondernt to consider the service of the petitioner by treating his date of birth as 01.'1 'r . rg'|i5 and to grant ail the anciilary benefits, pencing the disposar of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI N.ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No..l : SRI G.VIDyASAGAR, Sr.Counsel Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3 : -- The Court made the following: ORDER I i THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA W.P.N0.5924 0F 2017 ORDER, (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G.Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1/High Courl' Perused the record.

2. The present is a petition where the petitioner, who is Judiciat Officer under the Telangana State JLrdicial Services' has sought for correction of the date of birth'

3. The petitioner has cornpleted his secondary school certificate course in March, 1980. In the secondary school certificate, the date of birth is reflected as 05'04'1965' Ihe petitioner subsequently undertook his further educational career and finally entered into judicial service on 23'10 2003' Even at the time of seeking employment and all through his educational career, the petitioner, gave his date of birth as 2

05.04.196-5 and it is same that is reflected in his service records as well.

1. In th,) year 2015, the petitioner has got a birth r:ertificate issued bv A rrarapuram Municiparity on 19.07.20 r -5. Ir r the said cerlificate, tl.re date of birth of the petitioner is reflec:ed kr be one as 01. t L I965. It is on the basis of this another dat,.: of birth which is reflecred in the birth cefiificate of the municipality that the petitioner. has sought for comection of his date of birth in his employrnent lvhich would entail him an additional of ar,rund six months sen.ir :r: pcriod.

5. So fbr as the correction of the date of birth is colcemcd. it is by now rvell settled proposition that for all the f.racrical purposes. the .'orect date of birrh for entry in the servicc r(,corcl or for that mattel in any of the statutory records are con:emed. it would be tlrr: date of birth reflected in the secondary school ceftificatc. T'h:re does not seem to be any discrepancy on thc date of birth reflecled in the service record, vis_a_vzs the date ol birth reflected in the secondary school certificate. Moreover, till date 3 there does not seem to be correction made or sought for in the secondary school certificate also by the petitioner.

6. Recently, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sanyasi Rao vs. High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Rep' by its Regislrart had an occasion of deating with somewhat similar issue and in the said judgment in paragraph 3i has held as under: "The petitioner did not make any atlempt to get the date of birth corrected in his school records Upon correction of date of birth in the school records, petitioner could have got the same corrected in the HSSLC as well. However, even this was not done. Therefore, as of today, both in school/college records as well as in the HSSLC, petitioner's date of birth continues to be reflected as 29.03 2'1953 Permitting petitioner to correct his date of birth in service record would result in incongruous situation where there would be different dates recorded in his school records/HSSLC and service records, which is impermissible:". I I The said judgment factually also squarely applies in the instant case as well. ' 2oz4 scc online I'S 9 4 ,t :-l 7 . Given the said legal as also the factual posirion as is reflected in the preceding paragraphs, we do not find any strong case made o rt by the petitioner calling for issuance ol.anv writ in the nature o 1' Mandamus directing the respondents for any correction of rlate ol birth sought for. 8 The writ petition thus fails and is, accordingly, rejected There shall br: no order as to costs. ()onsccruentlv, miscellaneous petitions pending, if arry, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ASq{STANT REGISTRAR !\' ,i SECTION OFFICER To, v 1. One CC to SRt N.ASHWAN| KUMAR, Advocate. tOpUCl 2. One CC to SRt G.V|DYASAGAR, Advocate. tOpUCI 3. Two CD Copiesr. BSK GJP HIGH COURT DATED:1 110212025 ORDER WP.No.5924 of 2017 ,1'- '-- 1li': or- t. , l' 5 () 0 t ltpl ?UZs (' (' )a a SsFlr ttr * REJECTING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS