Shri Dnyaneshwar Baban Katkar [Petitioner] Vs. The Director General and Inspector [Respondents]
WRIT PETITION NO. 6847 OF 2024
(CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR & M. M. SATHAYE, JJ., delivered by M. M. SATHAYE, J.)
The Petitioner challenged the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal’s order dated 02/05/2024, which denied his request to change his date of birth in the service book from 01/06/1966 to 24/12/1968, along with consequential benefits. He joined as a Police Sub-Inspector on 15/09/1993, with his service book reflecting the date of birth as per his school leaving certificate. His father later affirmed that his correct birthdate was 24/12/1968. Despite multiple requests since 1995, the change was not effected. In 2022, he secured a Judicial Magistrate’s order directing the Gram Panchayat to amend records. A new birth certificate and Gazette notification followed. His 2024 application sought enforcement of these updates. The State opposed, citing Rule 38(2)(f) of the Maharashtra Civil Services Rules, restricting changes to clerical errors within five years of service entry. The government rejected his request on 08/01/2024. The Tribunal dismissed his plea, leading to the present petition.
Mr. Sakhare, Senior Advocate for the Petitioner, argued that the correction request was filed within five years of service, ensuring its validity. Despite reminders, the department failed to act. He emphasized that the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, a Central law, and its 2000 Rules govern birth record changes, superseding Maharashtra Civil Services Rules, 1981. A Judicial Magistrate’s 2022 order directed the Gram Panchayat to record the Petitioner’s birthdate as 24/12/1968, which was overlooked by the Tribunal. He cited multiple legal precedents supporting the Petitioner’s claim that the Central Act should prevail over State regulations.
Mr. Rajpurohit, Assistant Government Pleader for the Respondent-State, defended the Tribunal’s order. He argued that the 1969 Act’s precedence over the Maharashtra Civil Services (MCS) Rules, 1981, was not raised before the Tribunal and is irrelevant since the two laws govern different subjects. The MCS Rules regulate service conditions for state employees, whereas the Act concerns birth registration. Accepting the Petitioner’s argument would undermine Rule 38(2)(f), which bars date-of-birth changes beyond five years of service entry. He contended the Petitioner’s delay justifies rejection and cited multiple judgments to support the impugned order, opposing any interference by the Court.
The case examines the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, and its implications for service conditions under the Maharashtra Civil Services (MCS) Rules, 1981. The Act mandates timely reporting and registration of births and deaths, with provisions for delayed registration requiring a Magistrate’s order. The petitioner, a state police employee, sought to change his recorded date of birth near retirement, citing new evidence from his father. However, under Rule 38(2)(f) of the MCS Rules, corrections are only permitted within five years of joining service. Courts have consistently ruled against such late claims, emphasizing the impact on promotions, seniority, and government expenses. Given the petitioner’s delayed application and reliance on recently issued documents, the court dismissed the plea, reinforcing the principle that such changes should not be allowed near retirement.
