TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from 30th September, 1988 was challenged by him through OA No. 283/87 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad. By its order dated 26.8.1988 the Tribunal partly allowed the application directing as under : The decision dated 5th February, 1988 of the Competent authority communicated to the petitioner under letter dated 8.3.1988 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is directed that either the general Manager or his delegate C.P.O. of the respondent Railway Administration shall inform the petitioner at the earliest about the documents with a copy thereof, on which reliance is sought by the Railway Administration for arriving at a correct decision for his D.O.B. and permit the petitioner to produce relevant documents in support of his claim and decide the same within 6 months from the date of this order by a speaking order after giving the petitioner a personal hearing in the light of the observations made herein above and in accordance with law. I have no doubt that the competent authority will decide the matter afresh, without being influenced by the orders passed earlier. It is further ordered that in case the petitioner's claim for correction of birth dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r order of 26.8.1988 the C.P.O. had been directed to pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity to the respondent to produce his evidence and considering the same, the C.P.O. had not complied with the order in its correct perspective. The Tribunal found fault with the opinion of the C.P.O. that since the respondent had not availed of the final opportunity, provided by the Board asking all the literate employees to submit their representations if any, for correction of their recorded date of birth latest by 31.7.1993, therefore his belated claim for correction of his date of birth suffered from the vice of laches. The Tribunal relied upon a Full Bench judgment of the Tribunal in T.A. No. 1104/86 and 1089/86, wherein it had been held that the Railway Board's letter No. E(NG) ii-70-BR/1 dated 4.8.1972, prescribing 31.7.1973 as the last date for making representation, for effecting the change of date of birth, did not have the force of law and that an application by a railway employee for correction of his date of birth, could not be rejected on the ground that it had not been made before the last date prescribed in the Railway Board's letter dated 4.8.1972. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplication for correction of date of birth of a Government servant can be entertained. A Government servant who makes an application for correction of date of birth beyond the time, so fixed, therefore, cannot claim, as a matter of right, the correction of his date of birth even if he has good evidence to establish that the recorded date of birth is clearly erroneous. The law of limitation may operate harshly but it has to be applied with all its rigour and the courts or tribunals cannot come to the aid of those who sleep over their rights and allow the period of limitation to expire. Unless altered, his date of birth as recorded would determine his date of superannuation even if it amounts to abridging his right to continue in service on the basis of his actual age. 6. The Tribunal noticed the judgment rendered by this Court in Harnam Singh's case (supra) but curiously failed to follow it observing : Although the respondents neither quoted in the reply nor took the opportunity of bringing the case to our notice. We are bound to respect the ratio of the latest Supreme Court judgment in Union of India and Ors. v. Harnam Singh (1992) SC L S 375, in the matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, has been furnished by the respondent as to why he mentioned the date of birth as late as 20.2.1980 in the Provident Fund withdrawal form, as 6.9.1930 if he was already in possession of such evidence which showed his date of birth as 4.9.1934. 8. On 25.12.1985, for the first time, three decades after the respondent had entered into service, did the respondent make an application for correction of his date of birth without adducing any reliable documentary evidence in support of its claim and without in any manner explaining as to why the respondent had taken no action for all those thirty years. In the enquiry held by the C.P.O., consequent upon the remand of the case, the respondent relied upon three school leaving certificates procured belatedly and containing contradictory assertions. In this connection, it may be noticed that one of the school leaving certificates produced by the respondent shows that he was admitted to the school on 23.4.1949 and had left the school on 12.1.1950, without even completing one academic year of study. The respondent, on the basis of the above certificate, would appear to have joined the school in mid-session and left the school again in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
