Dr. Chenna Ramulu v. 1. Telangana Govt. Social Welfare Residpntial Educational Society

Heard Sri p.V.Krishanaiah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Services-Il appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2 T he Detitioner a Doroa ched the Court s ekinq oraver as under: "... to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the proceedings Rc.No.Zone-s /pWRlB/2023, dated 15.IL.2023 issued by the 1st respondent as arbitrary, illegal, malafide, void and u nconstitutiona l, violating Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same; issue consequential direction directing the 2nd and 3.d respohdents to forthwith alter the date of birth of the petitioner in the S.S.C. Certificate Bearing No. A 018123 and Roll No. 3gg528, dated March, 1984 in pursuance of the proposal sent by the Headmaster Z.P.P.S.S. Boys, Gudur Village, Gudur Mandal, Mahabubabad District in pursuance of the representation made by the petitioner dated L9.Og.2OZ3 as directed by the 2nd responddnt, further direct the 1st 2 SN, J respondent to alter the date of birth of the petitioner in the Service Register as 26.10.1967 instead of 01.04.1965 in pursuance of the alteration by the 2nd and 3'd respondent in S.S.C Certificate of tl-e petitioner, pending disposal of the Writ Petltion and f :rther direct the 1't respondent to allow the petitioner to continue in service treating his date of birth as 26.10..-967 instead of 01.04.1965 and pass..." 3 The case the oetitioner in riel' as Der the averme nts made in the affidavit filed bv the Detit roner ln rt of th r ent Wri P er:- The petitioner, belonging to the Scheduled Caste community, was initially appointed as a Health Supervi;or under the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent on a contr.rctual basis on

28.08.2002, and the petitioners services werr3 subsequently regularized with effect from 01.10.2007. It is specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner's grievance pertains to the erroneous recording of his date of birth during his early schooling. The petitioner's date of birth was originally recorded as 26.10.1967 in the admissiorr register of 1st Standard. However, it was altered to 1966 in 2nd Standard, and later to 01.04.1965 in 3rd Standard, withoul: any parental 3 SN, J consent or supporting documentation. This erroneous date of birth, 01.04.1965, continued through out the petitioners academic records, including the 1Oth Class, and subsequently reflected in the SSC certificate issued by the Board. Upon realization of this error after the petitioners regular appointment, the petitioner made eFforts to correct the discrepancy. The petitioner obtained the relevant school records and submitted a representation dated 04.04.20L6 to the respondents, requesting correction of the petitioner,s date of birth in the service records to reFlect the correct date as

26.t0.7967. As the said representation nemained unaddressed, the petitioner approached this Hon'ble COurt by filing W.p. No. 30869 of 2017, which was disposed of on 24.04.2023, directing the lst respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is further the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the Court's direction, the petitioner once again submitted detailed representations to the respondent Nos.1 to 3, enclosing all relevant documents in support of the petitioner's claim. The 2nd 4 SN, J respondent directed that the correction Propre5s; be routed through the proper educational hierarchy. Conrplying with this directive, the petitioner submitted the propo:;al through the Headmaster, the Mandal Educational Officer riMEO), and the District Educational Officer (DEO), Mahabubabac. The DEO, vide proceedings dated 27.09.2023, acknowledged .he request and sought submission of the correction proposal in the prescribed fo rm at. While the proposal for correction was und:r consideration before the respondent Nos.2 & 3, the 1't resp,ondent, without awaiting their final decision, rejected the petitiorrer's request for correction of the date of birth in the service register, through proceedings dated 15.11.2023. The rejection was based on the reasoning that such a correction could not be done without corresponding alteration in the SSC certificate. F,ggrieved by the said rejection the petitioner filed the present writ petition 4, PERUSED THE RECORDI A. The levant oortion of he order of this Court- dated

24.O4.2023 oassed in W.P.No.3O869 of 2O1.7 is extracted hereu nder 5 SN, J In that view of the matter, withou the case, this writ petition is d respondents, particularl y the t going into the merits of isposed of directing the 1st respondent, after stated to have been made by the petitioner to the 1st respondent, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period eight (08) weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of is order and communicate the same to the petitioner. B P R o edP c c z 1 1 o2 e b e- 1"t r s r r:- d n In the reference 1't read above, Dr.Ch. Ramulu, Health Supervisor, TSWRS/JC(G). Goilapalty, :usityui District has filed W.p.No.30B69 of 2017 sqeking tn. Oi."ttion. from the Hon'ble High Court to atter tnb Oate of birtfrls 26.t0.tg67 instead of 01.04.1965 in the Service nugirt". of the individual. The Hon'ble High Court wnile Oispoting the case on 24.04.2023. direcred the Secretary, iSWnEf Society that "after ob-taining necessarv information from the other respondents [i.e. Board of Secondary Educatinn. TS. Gun foundry, Hyderabad and the CommissLnei& oirector oF School, TS, Hyderabad land pass appropriale Jrders on the representation dated : 04.04.2016". In the reference 2nd read above, Dr.Ch. Ramulu, Health Supervisor, TSWRS/JC(G). poilapa1y,- jusiirur District white enctosing the represehtation out"Ji 6+ .04.20t6, court order dated 24.04.2023 and the Xerox topy of the Date of Birth certificate issued by the Heid Master, Upper lrilary School, Kothaguda on 28.07.20t0 hai requested to implement the court orders. In the reference 3.d read dbove, the Director, School Education, Telangana state while "niio.ing the representation dated 04.07.2023 of Dr.Ch Ramulu, Health 6 SN, J Supervisor has requested to take necessary action in the oii"it or the Hon'ble High Court in W'P'Nc'30869 of 20t7 iutii zq.q.z023 as the non'ble High Court particularly respondent, to conslder and pass Ji.".t"A the 1't appropriate orders in W.P'No.30869 of 2Ol-7 ' In the reference 4th read above, the Additional loint Seiretiry, Director of Government Exz minations' TS' H;;";;a has informed to Dr Ch Rarnulu that "the Oirector of School Education is the competent authority to giu"-oia".. for making correction of Date of Birth in the EompieteO SSCs and d-irected the individual to submit the io.rS.iion proposal along with relevant documents to the Oirector. of bchool Education, Telangana, Hyderabad inrougtr proper channel i.e., through Head Master of the Schoo-l concerned, Mandal Education Officer & District Education Officer, Warangal. In the reference 5th read above, Dr'Ch' Ramulu' Health Supervisor and Principal, TSWRS/JC(G)' Coflapuffy, Jagityal District was direr:ted to attend before the Secretary TSWREIS on 30'10'2O23 along *ltt, ,fl original evidences for hearing' Accordingly' itre p.incipa'1, TSWRS/JC Gollapally, Jagityat District ind or.Ch. Ramulu, Health Supervisor have attended for hearing on 3O.1O.2023 before the Secretary' TSWREIS. R In 4. r hc urt 16i m fter v rd er con idere th Ho o f muluon hearinq date i.e.3 .to h Dr ch. reo uest ofthe i divid al for alteri nq his date of bi h as 26.LO.L967 nstea ofO .04.19 55 is relected on School Certificate the qrou nds hat, in Seconda of birth is 28 hi videHa ll tic etN .388s 65 e fBi t heD .o h ve n 23 o D d a d n r / I 1 SN, J The request of Dr.Ch. Ramultt, Health Supervisor is also rejected on the following grounds:_ 1) As per AP Public Employment (Recording & Alteration of Date of Birth) Rules 1984) the date of birth as determined on the basis of the school records or any proof produced at the time of entering into service and entered in the service record shall be final and no suEsequent variation of date of birth in the School records for dny reason, shall be relevant for the purpose of service and on that basis the date of birth entered in the service records shall not be altered except in the case of bonafide clerical error, under the orders of the Government. 2) In any proceedings before the Government or any court, tribunal or other authority regard to alteration of the date of birth in the service records, the decree of a civil court in regard to alteration of date of birth in the school or the university records or the contents in the Judgment leading to such decree, or the effect of its implementation shall nol be taken into consideration in derogation to these rules and it is hereby declared that these iules shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment decree or order of a civil court ii-t regard to the alteraiion of date of birth in the School or the University records whether or not the Govern/trent is a part to such proceedings. Hence, the Hon'ble High Court orders in W.p.No.30869 of 20L7 are hereby complied. The Principal TSWRS/JC Gollqpalty, Jagityat District is hereby directed to take necessary action accordingly and serve the copy to the individual. o DIS USSIO AND C NCLUSI ON:- 5. Learned counsel appearing petitioner submits that the order impugned, dated 15.11.2023 issued by the l"t reppondent rejecting the on behalf of the 'I 8 SN, J request of the petitioner pertaining to the alteration of the petitioner's date of birth as 26.LO.L957 instead of

01.04.1965 is contrary to the earlier orders of this Court, dated 24.04.2023 passed in W.P.No:30869 of 2Ol7 wherein this Court directed the respondents, particularly the 1"t respondent herein to obtain necessary information from the other respondents i.e., responclent Nos.2 & 3 herein and then to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner, dated 04.04.2016 made to the 1't respondent, in accordance to law, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and communicate the 'decision to the petitioner.

6. A bare perusal of the order impugned, dated

15.11.2023 issued by the 1't respondent clearly indicates that the specific direction as observed in the order passed by this Court, dated 24.04.2O23 in W.P.No.3O869 of 2Ol7 which clearly directed the l"t respondlent to obtain necessary information from the respondent Nos.2 & 3 herein had not been foltowed and, the order impugned was passed hastily, without application of mind in a 9 SN, J routine mechanical manner and therefore, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petationer contends that the Writ Petition has to be pllowed as prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ petition.

7. A bare perusal of para No.5 of the impugned proceedings, dated 1S.11.2023 of the 1.t respondent, clearly indicates that the petitioner was directed to attend enquiry before the Secretary, TSWREIS on 3O.10.2O23 along with original evidences for hearing and accordingly, the petitioner and atso thF principat, TSWRS/JC Gollapally, Jagityal District attended for hearing on 30.10.2023 before the Secretary, TSWREIS, but without awaiting the outcome of the said enquiry and also without obtaining the information from ttqe other respondents i.e., respondent Nos.2 & 3, as specifically directed by this Court in its order, dated 24.04.2023 passed in W.P.No.3O869 ot 2017, filed by the petationer on an earlier occasion the impugned procee ings, dated 15.11.2023 had been passed by the l"t respondent rejecting the request of the petitioner pertaiqing to the atteration of petitioner's date of birth as 26.LO.1967 instead of d -f ( sN !

01.04.1965 hastily by the l"t respondent, without application of mind in a routine mechanical manner by- passing the Court orders, dated 24'04.2O23 passed in W.P.No.30869, only to avoid the contenipt proceedings.

8. Ta no into consideration l- a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-Il appearing on behalf of the respondents. c) The earlier order of this Court, dated 24-O4.2O23 passed in W.P.No.3O869 of 2Oa7 (referred to and extracted above) The contents of the order impugned d) Proca.Rc.No.Zone-slPWRl8/2023, dated 15.11.2023 issued by the 1't respondent (referred to and extracted above), which clearly indicate that the specific directions issued vide orders of this Court, dated 24.04.2O23 passed in W.P.No.3O869 of 2OL7 had not been considered nor implemented in its letter and spirit an(l the fact that necessary information had not been obtained from the II SN, J other respondents i specifically directed impugned, dated 15.11.2023 the 1.t respondent, routine mechanicat e., reFpondent Nos.2 & 3 as bY thls Court and the orders had been passed hastily by without application of mind in a manner, only to avoid contempt proceedings. \ T c t Pe iti o e-5 P s ed b 1"t re s remitted to th 1"t reSDon dent rssu e as directed bv Co P a r rda n b 4 r o 3 n s r t e e nder, c f s n 4 f t u tn a fn t r I n f d r a d I o r t o nsider vi eit s orde IE t, d te d t L7 u s w, h r f h f com mu n rcate the dectsion oetitioner, However, there shall be no order as to costs. and dul e th e t2 SN, J t Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- AHMED ASSI DULLAH KHAN T REGISTRAR / CTION OFFICER foundry, HYderabad. Saifabad, HYderabad 500004' SocietY, Masib Tank, HYderabad' Bldos Stat-e of Telanqana at Hyderabad ' ,. ,n" Secretary, Telangana Govt Social Welfare Resident al Educational 2. The Secreta.v, eortd oitJ"oioiry eoucation' State of Telangana' Gun 3. The Commissioner and Director of School Education' StaLte of Telangana' 4. The Principat S"cr.tii"t"otovernment' Social Welfare Dept ' Secretariat 5. i#"cc';'i" c.p ioiidEnvriEs - r, High court for the state of Telansana 6. ?i;;';c';i;t p ron SERVICES - ll, High court for the: State of relangana ?. 6;;'cc 6 sit P.v. KRIsHNAIAH, Advoc-ate^[oPUCl 8. one cc to sRl s.BHbb;Ai iiEoof isc ron srAtE FIESIDENTIAL " EoucArbrlnl socterv) Advocate [oPUc] 9. Two CD CoPies at Hvderabad. at Hvderabad. SA N1,. t/ E -;=Tr.- - --;-tJ.----:j-;-r* C.C. TODAY 1 lri . -' ' Ill D , . .rn ,J 116 t.\:.. i i -_-":i - : .:.:.

3.- /); '7 ). .{. HIGH COURT DATED:1410712025 ORDER WP.No.34231 ot 2023 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. \ q