REPORTABLE          IN THE SURPEME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 CIVIL APPEAL NO(s).1380 OF 2011                   (@ SLP (Civil) No(s).21528/2006)

NARINDER KAUR                                     Appellant(s)                  VERSUS

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT & ORS.                Respondent(s)

 O R D E R

Leave granted.

    This appeal is directed against the judgment dated  

20.4.2006 rendered by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana  

at  Chandigarh  in  CWP  No.16151  of  2003  by  which  the  

prayer  made  by  the  appellant  to  quash  order  dated  

12.5.2002 passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court at  

Chandigarh  on  its  administrative  side  declining  the  

request made by the appellant for effecting change in  

her  date  of  birth  from  26.1.1971  to  9.1.1972  is  

rejected.

From the record of the case, it is evident that the  

appellant  was  selected  to  the  Haryana  Civil  Services  

(Judicial) and was posted as Civil Judge (Jr. Division)  

Ambala City. She joined her duties on 20.5.2000. The  

case  of  the  appellant  is  that  her  date  of  birth  is  

9.1.1972 but it was wrongly mentioned in the records as  

26.1.1971,  on the basis of factually incorrect birth  

certificate  wherein  her  date of birth was shown to be

   - 2 -

26.1.1971. The Governor of Haryana in exercise of powers  

conferred  by  clause  (2)  of  Article  283  of  the  

Constitution  made  Punjab  Financial  Volume  I  (Haryana  

First Amendment) Rules, 2001 amending certain provisions  

of  Punjab  Financial  Vol.I  Rules  2001  providing  inter  

alia that in regard to the date of birth, a declaration  

of age made at the time of, or for the purpose of entry  

into Government service, shall as against the Government  

employee, be deemed to be conclusive unless he applies  

for correction of age as recorded within two years from  

date of his entry into Government service and when such  

an application is made a special inquiry shall be made  

to  ascertain  correct  age  by  making  reference  to  all  

available  sources  of  information  such  as  certified  

copies  of  entries  in  the  municipal  birth  register,  

university or school certificate indicating age, Janam  

Patrika, horoscopes etc.

The appellant realising that her date of birth  

was  wrongly  recorded  in  the  birth  certificate,  as  

26.1.1971  made  an  application  dated  12.4.2002  i.e.  

within  two  years   from  the  date  of  her  entry  into  

Government service, requesting the  authority concerned  

to change her  date  of  birth  from  26.1.1971  to  

9.1.1972.  By

- 3 -

communicating a non-speaking order dated 12.5.2002, the  

appellant was informed by the Registrar of Punjab and  

Haryana High Court, Chandigarh that the representation  

made by her seeking change in her date of birth was  

rejected by the High Court.

Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed CWP No.16151  

of 2003 before the High Court. The High court by the  

impugned judgment has dismissed the petition giving rise  

to the present appeal.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for  

the parties and considered the documents forming part of  

the instant appeal.  

The main reason assigned by the High Court for  

dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant is  

that  the  appellant  had  failed  to  show  satisfactorily  

that she had not taken any advantage of the recorded  

date of birth.  It was further held by the High Court  

that the appellant belonged to a mature class and her  

age as declared in the application Form for selection  

must have influenced the mind of the Selection Committee  

and, therefore, the principle of estoppel would apply to  

the facts of the case. The High Court also held that  

notification  dated 13.8.2001 is discretionary in nature

- 4 -

and the appellant is not entitled to change in her birth  

date on the basis of the said notification.

It may be mentioned that the State of Punjab  

and  Punjab  and  Haryana  High  Court  had  filed  reply  

affidavit before the High Court. However, no material  

was produced on the record of the case to show that the  

appellant had taken undue advantage of the recorded date  

of birth.  The proceedings relating to the selection of  

the appellant as Civil Judge never formed part of the  

instant case and, therefore, it was  preposterous on the  

part of the High Court to assume that the learned High  

Court Judges who were members of the Selection Committee  

while selecting the appellant as Civil Judge (J.D.) must  

have  been  influenced  by  the  age  of  the  appellant  as  

declared by her in the application form for selection.  

The record does not indicate that after receipt of the  

application from the appellant regarding change of her  

birth date, any inquiry, much less a special inquiry as  

contemplated by amended Rules of 2001 was undertaken by  

the High Court. It is true that the amended Rules of  

2001 are discretionary in nature but that fact by itself  

does not justify the High Court on its  administrative  

side  to ignore  them altogether and then to come to the

- 5 -

conclusion that on the basis of the discretionary rules,  

the appellant is not entitled to claim change in her  

date of birth.   

In  the  present  appeal,  Dr.  J.  P.  Singh,  

Director, Health & Family Welfare-cum-Chief Registrar,  

Births  &  Deaths,  Punjab  has  filed  an  affidavit  on  

26.8.2010 mentioning that as per the record maintained  

by  the  office  of  Local  Registrar,  Births  &  Deaths,  

Municipal  Council,  Rajpura,  Tehsil  Rajpura,  Distt.  

Patiala, Punjab, the entry of the birth of the appellant  

is recorded with particulars as Annual Sr. No.10, Date  

of Registration 11.1.1972, Date of Birth 9.1.1972. Thus,  

the State of Punjab has now admitted in this affidavit  

that the correct date of birth of the appellant as per  

births and deaths record was 9.1.1972.  The  contents of  

the affidavit filed by Dr. J. P. Singh, Director, Health  

& Family Welfare-cum-Chief Registrar, Births & Deaths,  

Punjab are not disputed or controverted in any manner by  

the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

In view of the presumtive value which attachs  

to the birth and death records, this Court is of the  

opinion that appeal deserves to be allowed.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal succeeds.

The  

- 6 -

judgment dated 20.4.2006 rendered by Division Bench of the  

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No.  

16151 of 2003, is hereby set aside.   CWP No. 16151 of 2003  

filed by the appellant in the High Court is allowed.  

The order dated 12.5.2002 passed by Punjab and Haryana  

High  court  on  its  Administrative  side  rejecting  the  

application dated 12.4.2002 made by the appellant to the  

High Court with a request to change her date of birth  

from  26.1.1971  to  9.1.1972  is  also  set  aside.   The  

application dated 12.4.2002 made by the appellant  to  

the  High  Court   to  change  her  date  of  birth  from  

26.1.1971  to  9.1.1972  stands  allowed.   Both  the  

respondents are hereby directed to carry out necessary  

changes in service record of the appellant by mentioning  

her  date  of  birth  to  be  9.1.1972.   The  appeal  

accordingly stands disposed of.

       .................J.  (J.M. PANCHAL)

NEW DELHI          .................J. FEBRUARY 4, 2011 (H.L. GOKHALE)