Jharkhand High Court
Christofer Toppo vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 28 March, 2017
Author: Shree Chandrashekhar
Bench: Shree Chandrashekhar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (S) No. 1008 of 2008
Christofer Toppo, son of Late Joseph Toppo, resident of M.I.G.81,
Hanuman Nagar, P.O. Kankarbag, P.S. Patrakar Nagar, District
Patna (Bihar) .... ...... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Director GeneralCumInspector General of Police,
Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. Director General, Special Branch, Jharkhand, Ranchi
4. Superintendent of Police, Special Branch, Jharkhand, Ranchi
5. Additional Superintendent of Police, Special Branch, Jharkhand,
Ranchi
.... ..... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amritansh Vats, Adv.
For the State : Mr. R.K. Shahi, JC to AAG
05/28.03.2017The petitioner claims that his correct date of birth is 30.12.1951. He has challenged the reasoned order passed by the respondentauthority on 04.04.2007, whereby his claim for correction in his date of birth has been declined.
2. Briefly stated, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(S). No.3874 of 2004, which was disposed of with a direction to hold an enquiry and medical examination of the petitioner. The petitioner was subjected to medical examination and the Medical Board determined his age as 55 years as on 10.11.2006. He again approached this Court in W.P.(S) No.7478 of 2006 with a grievance that he has been ordered to retire prematurely. The writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 19.12.2006 with a direction to the respondents to pass an appropriate order considering the opinion of the Medical Board. Order dated 19.12.2006 would reveal that in the writ proceeding the respondents pleaded that the petitioner has been found accused of tempering with his date of birth in the official 2 records. In compliance of order dated 19.12.2006, reasoned order has been passed on 04.04.2007, which has been impugned by the petitioner in the present proceeding.
3. Narrating the steps taken by the respondents in compliance of orders passed by the writ Court, in the counteraffidavit it is stated that a Committee comprising of Deputy Superintendent of Police and one Inspector of Police was constituted, however, the petitioner never associated himself with the enquiry nor did he remain physically present in course of the enquiry. Forensic report of the record would reveal that digit "12" for the month and the digit "51" for the year were overwritten with different inks by erasing mechanically the previous entries. On the basis of the forensic report, it was concluded that the petitioner's date of birth can never be 30.12.1951. When his School Leaving Certificate was enquired, it was found that in the year 1965 there was no Mahendra Kumar Verma posted as the Principal in the said school rather, he was posted as the Principal of the school in the year 1972 and thus, the School Leaving Certificate was also found forged. On the basis of the date of birth of the petitioner mentioned at the time of his joining as well as in the seniority list prepared by the department wherein his date of birth would appear as 30.01.1943, the respondents accepted this date as the petitioner's date of birth for his employment under the respondents.
4. In the aforesaid facts, finding no infirmity in the impugned order dated 04.04.2007, the writ petition is dismissed.
(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) Pankaj/R.Sinha