M. SALEEM CHAUDHRY (CHAIRMAN).-----The appellant in this case was a refugee from Patiala State which forms part of India and was recruited as a Peon by the Senior Civil Judge, Lahore, on 18-4-1950. His date of birth as mentioned in the Service Book is 28th September, 1919, which the appellant now challenges. At the relevant time he was serving as Orderly/Peon with the Senior Civil Judge, Lahore. It was in 1976, that the appellant for the first time challenged his date of birth on the plea that it was then that he came to know of this wrong entry. According to the appellant in the area of his origin i. e. Patiala State the calendar was reckoned according to the Bikarmi system and his date of birth in that system is 15 Asuj 1932, Bikarmi which when converted into Christian calendar should come to 28-9-1925. The appellant's request for change of his date of birth from 28th September, 1519, to 28th September, 1925, was rejected by the Senior Civil Judge on the ground of latches as according to the rules such a request could be entertained within a period of two years from the date of joining service. Appellant's appeal against the aforesaid order of Senior Civil Judge to the District & Sessions Judge, Lahore, was also rejected on the same ground. In this connection, rule 7.3 of the Punjab Financial Rules, Vol. V and Government circular letter dated 4-9- 1975 were relied upon by both the departmental authorities.
2. We are not impressed by the arguments advanced by the appellant that he was an illiterate person and remained all the time ignorant of the A recorded date of his birth or that the attestation of title pages of the Service Book were not done periodically by the appointing authority as required by the rules. The re-attestation even if done would not have revealed any error in the date of birth. Such error could be detected only if the appellant had moved for the same. Government policy in the matter of correction of date of birth is quite conclusive and clear in their circular letter dated 4th September, 1975, relied upon by the departmental authorities. It would be advantageous to reproduce the provisions of the aforesaid letter as below: "(1) I am directed to refer to the Circular letter No. 20076(H) Gaz., dated 4th August, 1928, in which it was laid down that a declaration of age made by a Government servant at the time of or for the purpose of entry into Government service shall be deemed to be conclusive unless he applied for the correction of his date of birth within two years of the date of entry into service. It was further laid down that Government servants, who were then in service, could, if necessary apply for correction of recorded date of birth within one year of the issue of that communication.
(2) This policy was further reconsidered by the Government in the year 1954, and vide its Circular Letter No. 437-54/Gaz., dated 30th September, 1954, the then Punjab Government held the view that it was incumbent upon a Government Servant to ascertain his correct date of birth and to produce proper proof in support thereof at the time when first entry to that effect was made in the Government record and that no subsequent alteration should be permitted to be made therein. It was, therefore, decided that applications from Government servants for change in the recorded date of birth should not at all be entertained in future and that they should be rejected straightaway.
(3) It has, however, come to the notice of Government that the above policy is not being followed strictly by certain Departments and applications are being entertained for the correction of the recorded date of birth, in some cases, even at a time when the officials arc due to superannuate.
This is not only in violation of the above policy of the Government but also results in delaying their pension cases.
(4) I am, therefore, to request you to ensure that the above instructions are strictly followed and case cases of exceptional nature only may be sent to this Department, with full justification, for obtaining the orders of the Chief Minister for the relaxation of the rules in their behalf. I am to request further that these instructions may kindly be brought to the notice of all concerned for strict compliance."
3. It was incumbent upon the appellant to have moved the departmental authorities within two years of his joining the service but he took 26 years to do so. We do not find any merit in this appeal in the light of the above policy letter of the Government and dismiss the same in limine.