P.Sabapathi, v. The Director General Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 13.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR P.Sabapathi ... Appellant / Writ Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Law and Order, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Polce, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli.

... Respondents / Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying this Court to allow this writ appeal by setting aside the orders passed in W.P.(MD)No.21311 of 2014, dated 09.07.2019.

For Appellant : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader 1/5

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) The appellant herein was appointed as Sub Inspector of Police on 16.04.1999. He submitted an application on 26.04.2001 seeking correction of his date of birth in the service register. His request was rejected vide order dated 03.01.2011 by the DIG of Police, Tirunelveli Region. Challenging the same, the appellant filed W.P.(MD)No.21311 of 2014. The writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 09.07.2019. Challenging the same, this writ appeal has been filed.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant reiterated all the contentions set out in the grounds of appeal. He pointed out that the birth certificate clearly indicates that his actual date of birth is 05.11.1969 and not 03.03.1968. He called upon this Court to set aside the order of the learned single Judge as well as the order impugned in the writ petition and allow the writ appeal as prayed for.

2/5

3. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the learned single Judge had logically approached the issue and interference with the said order is not warranted.

4. We carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. We wanted to know as to when the appellant's date of birth was registered.

5. The learned single Judge noted that as per the school records, the appellant was admitted in the 1st standard on 27.06.1973. In fact, in the school record, his date of birth was entered only as 03.03.1968. If the appellant's parents had mentioned his date of birth as 05.11.1969, he would not have been admitted in the 1st standard in June 1973. He would have been considered as underage candidate. Having gained in education by mentioning his date of birth as 03.03.1968, it is not open to the appellant to subsequently revise his date of birth so that he can have longer years of service. The learned single Judge had also noted that attempt to correct the date of birth was done after the appellant entered service. There was a lapse of almost 31 years. That is why, the learned 3/5

single Judge sustained the order of the competent authority and declined to interfere.

6. The approach of the learned single Judge is sound and we decline to interfere. The writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. (G.R.S., J.) (K.R.S., J.) 13.08.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No rmi To 1.The Director General of Police, Law and Order, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Polce, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli.

4/5

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

AND K.RAJASEKAR, J.

rmi W.A(MD) No.1540 of 2019 13.08.2025 5/5