V.Venkatesh v. The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.9048 OF 2017 DATED :20.03.2017 Between :

V.Venkatesh S/o.Krishnaiah, Aged about 58 yrs, Occu : Barber, R/o.No.8, Barber Quarters, Tirumala, Chittor District, Andhra Pradesh ..

Petitioner And The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam, Tirumala, Chittoor District, rep., by Executive Officer.

.. Respondent This court made the following :

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.9048 of 2017 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioner was engaged as barber in Kalyana Katta of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam under Mirasidar system in 1978. Later his services were regularized. In the service register the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 01.07.1948. Though initially petitioner did not protest, later he seems to have started agitating for correction of his date of birth contending that his actual date of birth is 04.09.1957 and there was wrong entry of date of birth. Taking due note of his complaint, matter was considered and petitioner was informed vide proceedings ROC No.TL/6/3411/96 dated 19.03.2003, about rejection of his claim for alteration of date of birth for the reasons mentioned therein. Petitioner kept quiet and thereafter retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation, as per the entry made in the service record, on 30.06.2006. Petitioner now challenges the action of the respondent authority in not altering the date of birth in the service record.

3.

The entry of date of birth in service record is regulated by A.P.Public Employment (Recording and Alteration of Date of Birth) Rules, 1984 (for short 'the Rules'). The Rules prescribe detail procedure for entering of date of birth. The Rules prohibit correction of date of birth, once the entry has become final unless there is a clerical error. The same fact was informed to the petitioner vide proceedings dated 19.03.2003. Petitioner himself

files an extract of the service record where such entry is made. Even assuming that what is contended by the petitioner is true, the entry made in the service record is contrary to the entry of date of birth in S.S.C., certificate employee cannot seek for correction after long lapse of time.

4.

Having regard to the provisions of the 1984 Rules and having regard to the fact that petitioner instituted this writ petition after more than ten years of his retirement, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 20th March, 2017 Rds