Delhi High Court
Shaukat Ali vs Indian Airlines on 4 August, 1989
Equivalent citations: AIR1989DELHI63A, 39(1989)DLT227
JUDGMENT S.B. Wad, J.
(1) The only question in this Writ Petition is whether the petitioner is entitled to the change of date of birth on the basis of school leaving certificate. The petitioner was recruited as a Peon with the respondent son 7.7.1953 and his age was recorded as thirty years. In 1964 the respondents issued a general circular calling upon those employees who alleged that their date of birth was wrongly .recorded to appear for the medical examination. The petitioner states that he did not get a copy of the circular but lateron pursuant to a subsequent letter he was examined medically. The Medical Board opined that his date of birth was 24.5.1924. In the subsequent seniority list the date of birth of 1924 was shown. Actually there isamistake. Instead of 24.5.1924 the date of birth recorded in the seniority list was 24.11.1924. The counsel for the respondents stales that although the petitioner had the knowledge of the alleged incorrect recording of the date of birth, be did not take any action, however, on the eve of his retirement which was to come up on 31.5.1982 he filed a School Leaving Certificate from the Head Master, Urdu Medium Primary School, Village Kamalpur,District Bulandshahar (U.P.) in which the recorded date of birth is 4.7.1937.
(2) The counsel for the respondents submits that the School Leaving Certificate submitted after the long lapse and on the eve of retirement should not be accepted. During the course of the hearing I directed the respondents to ascertain whether the certificate produced by the petitioner was genuine ornot. The respondent have made the inquiries and have found that the certificate was genuine. On these facts the question is whether the petitioner's date of birth should or should not be corrected on the basis of the genuine school leaving certificate only because it has been filed after the longtime. The facts of this case. do not show that the alleged delay is so fatal.It has been held in some cases that the delay creates a suspicion in regard to genuineness of the certificate produced at the later stage. But that is not a case here. About the genuineness of the School Leaving Certificate there is no doubt. The respondents have also admitted this. I do not think that it would be power or just to reject the said School Leaving Certificate as it would cause serious prejudice to the petitioner by loss of seven years of service affecting his pension and other benefits. I hold that the school leaving Certificate is genuine and, therefore, the date of birth is 4.7.1937.
(3) During the course of the arguments of this petition the petitioner died and his heirs are brought on record. The legal heirs would be entitled to all the consequential reliefs which the petitioner would have got on the basis of the date of birth as 4.7.1937. The respondents are directed to workout all the consequential benefits in terms of salary for the additional period pension and gratuity worked out on the basis of the new salary that would be fixed after passing the consequential order.
(4) For the reasons stated above the petition is allowed Rule is madeabsolute. Since the original petitioner is already dead the respondents are directed to work out the consequential payments early and to make the payments to the legal representatives of the petitioner within three months from today.