M.Retnabai, v. The Chairman,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.02.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH W.P.No.3346 of 2020 M.Retnabai ... Petitioner -Vs1. The Chairman, 10th Floor, NPKRR Maligai, 144, Annasalai, Chennai - 600 002.
2. The Chief Engineer (Personal), 8th Floor, NPKRR Maligai, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.
3. The Chief Internal Audit Officer, Chennai, 144, Annasalai, Chennai 600 002.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the impugned order in Memo No.37783/A2/A21/2018-1 dated 23.08.2018 passed by the 1st respondent quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to alter the date of birth as 30.11.1962 instead of 17.04.1962 in the service records of the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajendran For Respondents : Mr.Karthik Rajan Senior Standing Counsel
ORDER
By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
2.
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned Memo dated 23.08.2018 issued by the 1st respondent
rejecting the claim made by the petitioner for alteration of date of birth.
3.
The case of the petitioner is that her actual date of Birth is 30.11.1962 and it was wrongly entered as 17.04.1962. The petitioner entered the service in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board in the year 1984. The petitioner for the first time claimed for alteration of Date of Birth at the verge of her retirement in the year 2018. This application made by the petitioner came to be rejected by the 1st respondent on the ground that the claim for alteration of date of birth can be entertained only if it is given within five years from the date of entering into the service. Since the same was given almost at the verge of retirement, it was rejected.
4.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 5.
This Court does not find any ground to interfere with the rejection order passed by the 1st respondent. The service rules provides that the application must be made within a period of five years from the date of entering into service for alteration of date of birth. Admittedly, the same has not been done by the petitioner and therefore, the 1st respondent was perfectly right in rejecting the application. This Court does not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order of the 1st respondent and accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rka To
1. The Chairman, 10th Floor, NPKRR Maligai, 144, Annasalai, Chennai - 600 002.
2. The Chief Engineer (Personal), 8th Floor, NPKRR Maligai, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.
3. The Chief Internal Audit Officer, Chennai, 144, Annasalai, Chennai 600 002.
+1cc to Mr.M.Rajendran , Advocate SR.No. 11329 +1cc to Mr.Karthik , Advocate SR.No. 11146 W.P.No.3346 of 2020 nmi A.SK(23/03/2020)