PRAVIN JANARDHAN YESHWANTE v. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER F AND A AND OTHERS
Correction of Date of Birth in Service Records: Birth Certificate Prevails Over School Records; Service Rules Govern.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AUG:34820-DB
Decision Date: 12-12-2025
List of Laws
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969; MSETCL Service Regulations, 2012; Secondary School Code; Service Law
- Facts: The petitioner, an employee of MSETCL, sought correction of his date of birth in the service record, claiming his actual date of birth was 26.09.1972 as per his birth certificate and birth register extract, not 01.01.1970 as recorded based on his Secondary School Certificate. His initial representations were rejected, and the respondents insisted on correcting the SSC first.
- Procedural Posture: The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the rejection of his request for correction of his date of birth and seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to correct his service record. The case was taken up for final hearing with the consent of the parties.
- Issue: Whether the respondent authorities were justified in rejecting the petitioner's request for correction of his date of birth in the service record based on the birth certificate and birth register extract, and whether the petitioner was required to first correct his SSC before seeking alteration of the service record.
- Holding: The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned communications rejecting the petitioner's request, and directed the respondents to correct the date of birth in the service records to 26.09.1972 within eight weeks.
- Reasoning: The Court found the respondents' insistence on a six-month limitation period for correction to be "thoroughly misconceived", noting that MSETCL regulations allow for alteration within one year of entry into service. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's observations in Union of India Vs Harnam Singh that the limitation prescribed in the applicable service rules governs the inquiry. It held that the requirement to correct the SSC first was untenable as service records are governed by service rules, not the Secondary School Code. The Court cited CIDCO vs. Vasudha Gorakhnath Mandevlekar and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Premlal Shrivas, emphasizing that birth register entries carry a statutory presumption of correctness and should be preferred over school records. The Court also noted the unexplained delay and the respondents' mechanical rejection of the claim despite earlier court directions.
🔒 For Members Only