The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleasedtoissueaWrit,orderorDirectionparticularlyoneinthenatureofWritof MandamusdeclaringtheimpugnedactionoftheRespondentsinillegallyaltering recordeddateofbirtho3.0T.l966to03.0T.lg60ofthePetitionerinhisService Register and issuing impugned proceedings No'C1/591/2016 dated 13'07 '2018 stating no rnodification will be done in the Service Register and not taking any actionagainstthepersonresponsiblefortheillegalalterationintheService registerastotallyillegal'without,iurisdictionandViolativeofArticlel4'16and21 of the constitution of lndia and consequently set-aside the same by directing the RespondentstorestoretheoriginaldateofbirthofthePetitioneri.e.03.0T.l966 byremovingtheillegalaltereddateofbirthofo3.oT.l960intheServiceRegister and to take necessary action against the with all consequential benefits concerned. lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High court may be pleased to ,direct the Respondents to continue the petitioner in service as per his original date of birth entered in the Service Register i.e. 03.07.1 966 by suspending the impugned proceedings No.c1l591/2016 dated 13.07.20.18 passed by the 2nd Respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI ALLIKA SURESH Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : SRI RAMESH CHILLA (SC FOR SERVICE MATTERS OF ALL MUNtCtpALtTIES TELANGANA) counse|f ortheRespondents*"'''f ,iJ3fi#^'^il?if.rJ\ri]tNrsrRAnoN The Court made the following: ORDER TION,BLE SRI JT'STICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI{A WRIT PETITION No. 289L3 oF2o18 ORD ER: Petitionerwasinitiallyworkingascasuallabourin the l.t respondent - Municipal Council' Bhongir from 1987 onwards in Public Health Department' After completion of frve years of service, petitioner along with others approached this Court and obtained a direction to respondents to. a1low a minimum of time scale in the last grade service and accordingly' he was appointed to the last grade service in the minimum time scale of Rs. 1375-2375 on 17 'O4 '1999 ' Petitioner immediately reported along with Age certiFrcate dated 20'O4'1999 assessing his age as 33 years as on 2O-04' 1999' His date of birth was recorded as 03'07' 1966 and the same was also mentioned in IdentirY card' It is stated' recentl)" petitioner came to know that his date of birth was altered lvithout any notice from O3'O7'1966 03.07.1960 by an oven'!'riting' He immediately made a representatron dated 15.12 '2014 for rectifying the said alteration and also take action against persons responsible' As no action was taken' petitioner is stated to have hled O'A'No' 399 of 2Ol6before the Administrative Tribunal annexing thereto service register, identity card' Ii[c insurance policy and copy of his old school record of the 5tl' class The said O'A' was 2 disposed on 25.02.2016 directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation of petitioner within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. I{owever, the 2na respondent, without causing any enquiry into the same, passed the order dated 13.O7.2O18, impugned in this Wnr petition, on the basis of a letter said to have been received from the school Head Master dated 02.O3.2O 1g stating that they maintained records only from Oa.D2OOO and that no bona ftd.e cerLificate was issued from their office and that there is record of the same. Hence, the Writ petition.

2. The Commissioner, Bhongir Municipality filed counter stating that on the letter addressed by the 2"d respondent on 22.05.2017, the principat, MppS, Hanmapur, Yadadri-Bhongir District informed that no bona fid_e certificate was issued, certi$ring the date of birth of. pe titioner as 03.O7.1996 and no information regarding peririoner was avialable. It is sate that before the Tribunal, petrrroner produced identity card, service register, life i,surance poticr. and school record of the 5ft class, but did not produce the bona ftd.e certificate as the same was altered by him. It is pertinent to see that both the record sheet and bona fule certificate were rssued on the same date i.e. lg.06. l97g but headmaster,s signature are different. It is also stated, scal stamp of the school u,hich was on the record sheet, the bold leLLer is sustained to M.p.p.S. F,w 3*.:1;-* 4,...' t' J Hanmapur only but on trre bono ftde certiflcate the ibold' is seen throughout the stamp in the' the date was altered and it is clearly visible; actually it appeared as 19'O5'1978 and it was altered to 18.O6.1978, signature of headmaster which was on the record sheet is different from the bono fid'e certihcate' Circle around first letter, circle should encircle the second letter and in the end, there should be a wave to end the sigrrature' but here itendedsmoothly.Thethirdlineoftheallegedbonaftd.e certificate issued by the headmaster '8' is not written completely and it could be seen the above date '18' it is written more clearly. Based on the bona fide certtficate ' mentioning the date of birth of the students' the certificates from 08'12'2OOO onwards were issued only as per the details of the admission register. The head maste r addressed in his letter Lhrat no bona fide certihcate was issued form their school certifying petitioner's date of birth as O3'O7- 1966 Based on the said information, the 2'd respondent informed petitioner through the letter impugned that no modification of date of birth would be done. J Heard Sri Allika Surcsh ' learned s6un5sl for the judgment tn Shr;,nkar Lal a. arrd Storte of Tamilnadu 0' TGV petitioner. He relies on Hindustan CoPPer Ltd'l Iz6jz) o scc zr r -."' 4 Venugopalan2 and submits that once a date .of birth is recorded in the employee service book by the employer that cannot be altered or modilied by any person, even the employee also cannot seek a relief for alteration of date of birth in service register at the fag end of service to extend his tenure should apply to the employer as well.

4. karned Standing Counsel for the lsr respondent Sri Ramesh Chilla reiterating the averments in the counter, made his submissions, seeking to dismiss the Writ petition.

5. To prove the date of birth 03.07. 1996 as true, petitioner along with Writ petition produced the copy of service book, health and age certificate, insurance policy, bona fide certificate (record sheet) said to have been issued by rhe Head Master, MPPS, Hanmapur, etcetera. Undoubtedl_v, all the above documents show the date of birth as O3.O7. 1966. Whereas respondents dispute the bona fide certificate, therefore, thc 2n.r respondent addressed letter dated 22.05.2027 to the principal, MPPS, Hanmapur who informed that no such certificate u,as issued by their school and the records are available only from 08.|2.2OOO. From the letter dated 02.O3.2O8 addressed by the Principal, the said fact is evident. Therefore, the representatron of petitioner rvas a,considered in the light of Lhe above, pursuant to ttie order of the Administrative Tribunal, and issued the ( lee.l ) 6 SC(- j0? ) impugned order stating that no modiircation of date of birth wouldbedoneintheserviceregister'Further,aspointedout by the respondents, petitioner has not annexed the bona hde certifrcate either with O.A. or the Writ Petition' He only annexed the record sheet. The same a'lso discloses alterations which could not be answered by petitioner and also the signature of Head Master is different from record sheet and the bona ftde certilicate said to have been issued by the Principal on the same day. There is no explanation forthcoming lrom petitioner in that regard. In the light of the same, the judgments relied on by petitioner cannot be taken into consideration' The Writ Petition' in tJle considered opinion of this Court, does not merit any consideration and the same is liable to be dismissed'

6. costs.

7. The Writ Petition is accordingly' dismissed' No Consequently, Miscellaneous Applications' if any shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. L. VIJAYA LAXMI ISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 2 One CC to SRI ALLIKA SURESH' Advocate lOPUCl S,t*.S:-g+:l"S*llm;rLLA (sc For Service Matters or Arr ii: -{:ln 3,:,:":,Y: i::3;l}:iij}f y,1i"Jo "'8'Yio' " D e ve I o p me nt' H i g h

4. Two CD CoP ies BSK GJP HIGH COURT DATED:2810512025 Ik 22 l.UE M :\ -.<.q' ^;- / -. ':/ ORDER WP.No.28913 of 2018 DTSMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS