← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/2645/2026disposed off

Bhausaheb Shivaji Shirsath v. The Educational Officer Sec Zilla Parishad Nashik And ORS

2026-04-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Hiten Shamrao Venegavkar2 pages

57 WP 2645.26.ODT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2645 OF 2026 Bhausaheb Shivaji Shirsath

...Petitioner

Versus

The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad Nashik, & Ors.

...Respondents

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Mr. Digvijay A. Patil a/w Anilkumar Patil for Petitioner. Mr. V.G. Badgujar, AGP for State.

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2026.04.17 19:33:50 +0530 CORAM :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR JJ.

DATE :

15th APRIL, 2026.

P.C.:

1.

The Petitioner desires a correction in his date of birth from 1st June, 1968 to 3rd November, 1970.

2.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has vehemently canvassed the grounds set out in the Petition. 3.

The Petitioner joined employment as a Peon in 1993 with Respondent Nos.2 and 3, Zilla Parishad in one of its Schools. On 29th November 2024, he was promoted as a Lab Assistant. He approached the Department of Public Health, Gram Panchayat, Chinchgavhan and sought a birth Certificate. His date of birth was

57 WP 2645.26.ODT recorded as 3rd November, 1970 and such certificate was issued by the Gram Panchayat on 28th January, 2025.

4.

It is further canvassed that the Petitioner's parents informed him that his date of birth was wrongly recorded. They are poor agriculturists, residing in a village. Now they realised that his date of birth was 3rd November, 1970. The School Leaving Certificate dated 1st July, 1992 indicates his date of birth as 1st June, 1968. His date of admission is 5th August, 1982.

5.

It is well settled that a litigant cannot be permitted to get his date of birth corrected when he is at the stroke of retirement. The Petitioner is due to retire on 31st May, 2026, which is around one month and two weeks from today. Moreover, the facts before us are glaring and which do not deserve any consideration. 6.

In view of the above, this Petition is dismissed. [HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J] [RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.] Dusane