Sarojani Devi Semwal v. State of Uttarakhand others

We have heard Ms. Medha Gaur, Advocat e for t he appellant , Mr. J.C. Pandey, St anding Counsel for t he St at e of Ut t arakhand and Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocat e for respondent nos.2 & 3.

6. Learned counsel for t he appellant subm it s t hat as t he appellant had not passed t he m at riculat ion exam inat ion, she had, at t he t im e of her appoint m ent , furnished a cert ificat e issued by t he Gram Pradhan, duly aut hent icat ed by t he Gram Panchayat Adhikari, in which her dat e of birt h was recorded as 16.12.1963. The said dat e was accordingly ent ered in her service book. I t is furt her cont ended t hat even in t he Fam ily Pension papers as well as in t he confirm at ion order dat ed 12.11.1999, her dat e of birt h was recorded as 16.12.1963. However, subsequent ly, t he Depart m ent , wit hout affording any opport unit y or issuing due not ice, alt ered her dat e of birt h from 16.12.1963 t o 09.12.1961.

7. Per cont ra, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 cont ends t hat at t he t im e of t he appellant ’s appoint m ent , she was required t o undergo a m edical fit ness exam inat ion, and in t he cert ificat e issued by t he Medical Officer, her age was recorded as 25 years. I t is 3 t herefore subm it t ed t hat , based on t he said m edical assessm ent , t he appellant was correct ly superannuat ed at t aining t he superannuat ion on 31.12.2021.

8. Since t he det erm inat ion of age at t he t im e of appoint m ent is governed by t he st at ut ory provisions cont ained in The Ut t arakhand Recruit m ent t o Services ( Det erm inat ion of Dat e of Birt h) Rules, 2003, which st ipulat e t hat t he age of a candidat e shall be det erm ined on t he basis of t he dat e of birt h recorded in t he m at riculat ion or equivalent cert ificat e, and in cases where t he em ployee has not passed t he m at riculat ion exam inat ion, t he dat e of birt h ent ered in t he service book at t he t im e of init ial appoint m ent shall be t reat ed as t he em ployee’s dat e of birt h. Furt herm ore, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 have fairly conceded t hat no show cause not ice was issued t o t he appellant prior t o alt ering her recorded dat e of birt h from 16.12.1963 t o 09.12.1961. I t is a well- set t led principle of law t hat t he dat e of birt h of an em ployee ent ails civil consequences and, t herefore, any alt erat ion t heret o cannot be m ade unilat erally by t he em ployer wit hout affording t he em ployee an opport unit y of hearing.

9. I n view of t he foregoing fact s and circum st ances, t he Special Appeal allowed. Consequent ly, t he im pugned order dat ed 23.12.2021 is hereby set aside, and t he writ pet it ion st ands allowed. Since t he appellant / pet it ioner was prem at urely ret ired on 31.12.2021, it would be j ust and equit able, in t he 4 int erest of j ust ice, t o direct t hat she shall be ent it led t o 50% of t he arrears of salary t he period from 01.01.2022 t o 31.12.2023. The dat e of birt h of t he appellant / pet it ioner shall be t reat ed as 16.12.1963, as originally recorded in her service book at t he t im e of appoint m ent and, accordingly, she shall be deem ed t o have superannuat ed on 31.12.2023. The respondent s are direct ed t o release 50% of t he arrears of salary t o t he appellant / pet it ioner for t he aforesaid period and, t hereaft er, recalculat e and revise her pension, t reat ing her t o have rem ained in service up t o 31.12.2023. The ent ire exercise shall be com plet ed wit hin a period of four weeks’ from t he dat e of product ion of a cert ified copy of t his order. ( G. N A REN D A R, C.J.) ( A LOK M A H RA , J.) Dat ed: 19.12.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dd db7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB98 7446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL 5