The petitioner joined the service in the University of Punjab. Lahore on 5-4-1957 and is now the Deputy Registrar in the Punjab University Lahore. He appeared in the Matriculation examination held in the year 1995. In the original Matriculation Certificate his date of birth was entered as 8-5- 1937. After many years he applied to the Board of Intermediate and Secondary' Education for the correction of his date of birth from 8-5-1937 to 23-11-1938. The Board accepted the application and changed the date of birth of the petitioner from 8-5-1937 to 23-11-1938 and accordingly issued duplicate Matriculation Certificate, copy whereof is at Annexure ' F'. After obtaining the duplicate Matriculation Certificate, he applied to the Pro-Vice---Chancellor of the University of Punjab for necessary correction of the date of birth in the service record of the University on the basis of duplicate Matriculation certificate so as to read 23-11-1938 as the correct date of birth in place of 8- 5-1937. This application was approved by the Pro-Vice--Chancellor in the following terms: - "In view of the above facts and documentary evidence enclosed, ' A' is approved."
2.Thereafter, he applied to the Registrar of the University on 11-2-1996 requesting him to take favourable action on his application dated 10-10-1995. This was followed by reminder on 2-3-1996.
On 18-4-1996 he submitted an application to the Vice-Chancellor and requested him to correct his date of birth in service record on the basis of the duplicate Matriculation certificate. In the application submitted to the Vice-Chancellor he also quoted four examples of the officers/employees of the University whose date of birth was corrected. Again on 7-8-1996 he submitted similar application to the Vice-Chancellor. Since no action was taken, he submitted applications to the Registrar of the University on 3-9-1996, 25-9-1996 and 20-10-1996 requesting for early decision on his application.
3. Without taking any decision on the aforesaid application of the petitioner, office order dated 25- 7-1996 was issued by the Deputy Registrar (Adorn.-II) of the University on the direction of the Vice- Chancellor of the University retiring the petitioner and to other officers from the service of the University on attaining the age of superannuation. According to this office order the petitioner was to retire on 7-5-1997 on attaining the age of sixty years on the basis of the date of birth as entered in the original Matriculation certificate before it was corrected by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore.
4. This order was challenged in the, present writ petition. The report and parawise comments were submitted. The petition was admitted to regular hearing on 23-4-1997. Thereafter, written statement was also filed by the respondent. In the written statement preliminary objection was raised which is as follows: -- "That the petitioner passed the Secondary School Examination in 1955 and his date of birth as written by him in the admission form was 8-5-1937. The petitioner joined the service of University of the Punjab on 5-4-1957 and the petitioner filed writ petition on 3-12-1996, therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed on the ground of laches. "
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner ought to have applied for the change of date of birth within to years after joining the service of the University in accordance with the Punjab Financial Rules which have been adopted by the Punjab University in accordance with the Statutes of the Punjab University relating to terms and conditions of service (page 392) of the Calendar of the University of the Punjab, 1990. Learned counsel has referred to clause (f) of paragraph 1 thereof which states "terms not expressly defined in these Statutes shall bear the same interpretation as they bear in the Civil Service Rules". On the strength of this clause (f), learned counsel for the respondent argued that in the Punjab Financial Rules, the period of to years is provided within which an employee can apply for correction of his date of birth which was not done by the petitioner, therefore, notwithstanding the correction in the Matriculation Certificate his date of birth would remain the same as entered in the original Matriculation Certificate for the purpose of his retirement.
6. On the other hand learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent University has been making changes in the service record of other employees on the basis of the changes/corrections made in the Matriculation Certificates and that the petitioner has been discriminated. He has cited the cases of Professor Dr. Rafiq Ahmad, Mr. Bashir Haider Sheikh, Mr. Abdul Majid and Mr. Said Akbar whose dates of birth were changed by the University after many years to service and were given benefits in the service accordingly. In the case of Professor Dr. Rafique Ahmed his date of birth was changed from 6-t 1-1925 to 3-5-1927 even after his retirement vide Office Order No. 975/P, dated 24-4-1989 (Copy Annexure ' L').
7. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of clause (f) of Paragraph 1 of the Statutes of the Punjab University relating to terms and conditions of service, the Punjab Financial Rules were adopted and are applicable whereunder the petitioner could seek correction of his date of birth within to years from Joining the service and since he failed to do so within the prescribed the this change which lie subsequently got effected could not be considered and acted upon by the respondent University, has no force.
8. The aforesaid clause (f) states that "terms not expressly defined in these Statutes shall bear the same interpretation as they bear in the Civil Service Rules." Under this clause only definitions and interpretation as given in the Civil Service Rules have been adopted. The condition as provided for the change of one's date of birth in the Punjab Financial Rules; would not thus be considered to have been adopted by the respondent-University in pursuance of clause (f), which specifically refers to the interpretation given in the Civil Service Rules. The Statutes of the University have not adopted this condition contained in the Punjab Financial Rules. Under the principle relating to the "legislation by reference", the referred legislation is confined to the extent of reference and applied accordingly.
9. The established practice of the departments including the respondent University is that the date of birth of an employee as entered in the Matriculation Certificate is regarded the basis for calculating the age of superannuation In the pre ill case the original Matriculation Certificate of the petitioner issued by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore contained 8-5- 1937 as the date of birth of the petitioner. It appears that in the year 1995, realising that he would be retiring in the near future, the petitioner applied to the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education for correction of his date of birth which the Board accordingly did and entered 23-11-1938 as date of birth of the petitioner instead of 8-5-1937 in the relevant record. The duplicate Matriculation Certificate was accordingly issued by the Board, copy whereof is at Annexure 'F', which states that "his date of birth as recorded in the admission form is 23-11-1938." This change in the Matriculation Certificate was not objected to or challenged by the respondent-University.
Therefore, as done in the cases of some other employees whose names are given in the earlier part of this judgment, the University ought to have changed the date of birth of the petitioner also according to the amended Matriculation Certificate
10. The respondent University failed to give effect to the correction made in the Matriculation Certificate of the petitioner and to the recommendations made by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor on 11- 10-1995 which resulted in superannuation of the petitioner on 7-5-1997. The respondent --University shall, therefore, make necessary changes in the service record of the petitioner and on the basis of the corrected date of birth the petitioner shall retire on attaining the age of superannuation.
11. Therefore, this petition is accepted and the office order dated 25/27-7-1996 retiring the petitioner with effect from 7-5-1997 is declared as without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
No order as to costs.