Date of Birth Recorded in Service Book to Prevail in Absence of High School Certificate: High Court

The Allahabad High Court has clarified that if an employee did not possess a high school or equivalent examination certificate at the time of entry into government service, the date of birth recorded in the service book will be treated as valid for all official purposes. The court further held that the date of birth recorded at the time of appointment cannot be changed after retirement.

 

The ruling came while hearing a matter related to an employee working in the Harduaganj Thermal Power Station, Aligarh. Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery referred to Rule 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment to Services (Determination of Date of Birth) Rules, 1974, and observed that the date of birth recorded at the time of entry into government service has to be treated as final.

 

According to the case details, the employee was appointed in 1988. At the time of his appointment, his date of birth was entered on the basis of a medical test as April 14, 1967. On the basis of this date, his retirement was due on April 30, 2026.

 

However, before retirement, the employee submitted a transfer certificate and claimed that his actual date of birth was April 14, 1966. On the basis of this document, the department changed his date of birth and revised his retirement date to April 30, 2026, treating him as older by one year.

 

The employee challenged the change, arguing that his date of birth had been recorded in the service book at the time of appointment and could not be altered later on the basis of a transfer certificate. The High Court accepted this argument and held that the date of birth mentioned in the service book must be treated as valid.

 

The court found that a high school certificate relating to the year 1966 date of birth was produced later and the change was made on that basis. However, the court said that a date of birth changed on the basis of such a transfer certificate could not be considered valid under the applicable rules, especially when the original service record had continued for decades without dispute.

 

The High Court also observed that changing an employee’s date of birth without notice and without giving the employee an opportunity of hearing was not proper. The court said that such a change, made behind the employee’s back, was against the principles of natural justice.

 

The court further stated that decisions affecting an employee’s retirement cannot be taken casually or unilaterally. Since the retirement date directly affects service tenure, salary, pensionary benefits and other rights, any change in the date of birth must strictly follow the law and prescribed procedure.

 

Granting relief to the employee, the High Court set aside all orders related to the change in his retirement date. The court directed the department to correct the original record and proceed on the basis of the date of birth entered in the service book.

 

The ruling is significant for government employees and departments because it reinforces the principle that the date of birth recorded at the time of appointment has finality. If an employee did not have a high school or equivalent certificate at the time of joining service, then the date of birth entered in the service book will remain valid for official purposes.

 

The judgment also makes clear that a date of birth dispute cannot be reopened after a long period, particularly after retirement or close to retirement, unless the rules clearly permit such correction. The decision is expected to guide departments in handling similar disputes related to service records, retirement dates and birth certificate discrepancies.