Nallammal v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.12.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Nallammal ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Dindigul District , Dindigul

2. The Personnel Assistant to the Collector, Noon Meal Department, Collectorate Office, Dindigul District 3.The Commissioner Author Union, In-charge, Now at Sempatti, Dindigul District. ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner representations dated 19.11.1998 24.12.1998 and

19.11.2019 to rectify the correction of petitioner age made in the service register as 01.07.1962 to be corrected as 1970 the year of birth in the service register maintained by the 3rd respondent.

For Petitioner :

Mr.J.Sivaram For Respondents :

Mr.G.Vairam Santhosh Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the third respondent to consider the petitioner representations dated 19.11.1998, 24.12.1998 and 19.11.2019 to rectify the correction of his age made in the service register maintained by the third respondent as 01.07.1962 to be corrected as 01.07.1970.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Noon-meal Assistant as per the proceedings of the third respondent and the service register was placed in the year 1997. While joining the duty before the third respondent, due to non-availability of the birth certificate, the third

respondent has directed the petitioner to obtain the age certificate from the Civil Surgeon Government Headquarters Hospital, Dindigul. On 18.07.1997, the Civil Surgeon issued the age certificate, but, in that certificate, the date of birth of the petitioner has been wrongly mentioned. For rectification of the date of birth, he made representations dated 19.11.1998, 24.12.1998 and 19.11.1998. However, the same was not considered. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Heard Mr.J.Sivaram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.G.Vairam Santhosh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

4. The facts in the present case are not in dispute. The petitioner claims that his actual date of birth is 01.07.1970, however, in the Service Register, it has been wrongly mentioned as 01.07.1962 for which, he has made several representations. However, as per Section 49(a) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules, the time limit prescribed for making application for alteration of date of birth is five years. But, the

representations of the petitioner are beyond five years which cannot be entertained. Further, the petitioner has retired from service in the year 2020. Hence, no further order is required to be passed in the present writ petition.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 09.12.2022 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ssb To

1. The District Collector Dindigul District , Dindigul

2. The Personnel Assistant to the Collector, Noon Meal Department, Collectorate Office, Dindigul District 3 The Commissioner Author Union, In-charge, Now at Sempatti, Dindigul District.

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

ssb 09.12.2022