Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Mahal Singh Son Of Late Sh. Raj Singh Age ... vs Employees State Insurance Corporation ... on 27 October, 2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 060/00976/2016
Date of filing: 24.10.2016
Order reserved on: 25.10.2016
Chandigarh, this the 27th day of October, 2016
CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL, MEMBER (J) &
HONBLE SMT. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A)
Mahal Singh son of late Sh. Raj Singh age 57 = years, Nursing Orderly, Employees State Insurance Corporation Model Hospital, Bharat Nagar, Ludhiana 141001 (Group-C).
.APPLICANT
BY ADVOCATE: SHRI BARJESH MITTAL
VERSUS
1. Employees State Insurance Corporation Head Quarters Office Panchdeep Bhawan, C.I.G. Marg, New Delhi through its Director General.
2. Medical Superintendent, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Model Hospital, Bharat Nagar, Ludhiana 141001.
3. Chief Record Officer, Electronic & Mechanical Engineer (EME) Record Office, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Secundarabad (AP) 500021.
.RESPONDENTS
ORDER
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL, MEMBER(J):-
This Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 has been filed by Mahal Singh applicant seeking following relief:-
(ii) That the impugned order Annexure A-1 dated 13.10.2016 be quashed/set aside and invalidated.
(iii) That directions be issued to respondents to continue to consider the date of birth of 23.04.1959 as recorded in the service book of the applicant pursuant to his matriculation certificate since his initial appointment as correct date of birth and not to consider the date of birth of 11.10.1956 as recorded in the discharge book/certificate and consequently to allow the applicant to continue on the post of Nursing Orderly till his attaining the age of superannuation of 60 years i.e. till 30.04.2019 as per correct date of birth of 23.04.1959 at ESIC Model Hospital, Ludhiana without any interruption in the interest of justice.
2. Case of the applicant is that he joined Indian Army as Sepoy in the year 1974 and was discharged from the Army on 28.8.2000 after putting in 26 years service vide discharge certificate/identity card (Annexure A-3). His date of birth in Army service record was got recorded as 11.10.1956 by his illiterate parents on the basis of medical report. During the army service, he passed middle standard examination in the year 1984 and matriculation/secondary school examination in the year 1986 from Punjab School Education Board vide certificates (Annexure A-2 collectively). His date of birth therein is recorded as 23.4.1959. After passing matriculation examination, the applicant applied to Army Authorities for change of his date of birth in service record from 11.10.1956 to 23.04.1959. But the said request was declined as it was made after gap of 5 years from the date of joining service. He did not pursue the matter because he had to be discharged from Army service after putting in particular length of service (22 years or 26 years depending on his rank) and not on the basis of age.
3. After discharge from Army, as Ex-serviceman, he got reemployed with respondents (Employees State Insurance Corporation) as Nursing Orderly vide appointment letter dated 31.12.2008 (Annexure A-5). He accordingly joined the said post on 09.01.2009. At the time of said appointment, he submitted his matriculation certificate as well as discharge record of Army. His date of birth in service record with respondents was correctly entered as 23.04.1959. However, respondents gave show cause notice dated 5.8.2016 (Annexure A-6) to the applicant for changing his date of birth to 11.10.1956. He submitted reply dated 3.9.2016 (Annexure A-7) to the show cause notice. The respondents vide impugned order dated 13.10.2016 (Annexure A-1) have ordered that his date of birth in service record with the respondents be entered as 11.10.1956. Hence this O.A.
4. In the grounds, it is alleged that according to DoPT O.M. dated 19.5.1993 (Annexure A-9), new entrant in Govt. service has to get his date of birth rerecorded in the service book on the basis of documentary evidence such as matriculation certificate or birth entry certificate. It was done in the case of the applicant on his entry into service with the respondents and his date of birth has been correctly entered as 23.04.1959 as per his matriculation certificate (Annexure A-2). Secondly, if wrong date of birth has been recorded in previous employment, the same does not debar the applicant from getting the correct date of birth recorded in subsequent employment on the basis of matriculation certificate. Thirdly, there is no allegation that matriculation certificate submitted by the applicant at the time of his entry into service with respondents was false, forged or fabricated.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant on the question of admission of the O.A. and perused the case file.
6. Counsel for the applicant reiterated the grounds pleaded in the O.A.
7. We have carefully considered the matter. Admittedly date of birth of the applaint in his service record with the Army was entered as 11.10.1956. He got reemployed with respondents as Ex-serviceman. Consequently his date of birth in service record with the respondents has also been rightly ordered to be recorded as 11.10.1956 instead of 23.4.1959. In this context, it is significant to notice that the applicant joined Army service in the year 1974. If his correct date of birth is 23.4.1959, he would not have been entitled to join Army service in the year 1974 at the age of 15 years only. Thus the applicant taking benefit of his date of birth as 11.10.1956 joined the Army service in the year 1974. Now the applicant cannot turn around and say that his date of birth should be recorded as 23.4.1959. There is also no birth entry of the applicant depicting his date of birth as 23.4.1959. There is also no basis for entering the applicants date of birth as 23.4.1959 in his matriculation certificate. His application to correct the said date of birth in Army service record was admittedly rejected by the Army Authorities. At the risk of repetition, it has to be highlighted that if correct date of birth of the applicant is assumed to be 23.4.1959, he would not have been entitled to join Army service in 1974 at the age of 15 years only.
8. Entry of applicant in service with respondents cannot be said to be his new entry into service for the purpose of recording his date of birth. On the other hand, it is re-employment of the applicant with the respondents on the ground of the applicant being ex-serviceman. Consequently, his date of birth recorded in Army record as 11.10.1956 has been rightly ordered to be recorded in his service record with the respondents as well. The date of birth of the applicant recorded in Army service record cannot be said to be incorrect keeping in view his entry into Army service in the year 1974. Even if the matriculation certificate is not false, forged or fabricated, it would not entitle the applicant to get his date of birth recorded as 23.4.1959 in service record with the respondents because his date of birth already recorded in his Army service record is 11.10.1956 on the basis of which he got entry into Army service. He could not have entered into Army service with his date of birth as 23.4.1959.
9. For the reasons aforesaid, we find no infirmity much less illegality in impugned order dated 13.10.2016 (Annexure A-1). Instant O.A. filed by the applicant is gross abuse of process of Court. The O.A. deserves to be dismissed with costs but we refrain from imposing costs on the applicant keeping in view his status as Group-C employee and keeping in view the fact that he is an ex-serviceman.
10. There is thus no ground to entertain this O.A. Accordingly the O.A. is dismissed in limine.
(JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL) MEMBER (J) (RAJWANT SANDHU) MEMBER (A) Dated: 27.10.2016 `SK 1 (O.A. No. 060/00976/2016)