L. VENKATARAMAN (DECEASED), vs STATE OF TAMILNADU REP. BY
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP No. 25134 of 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WP No. 25134 of 2007
CNR:{HCMA010131622007}
1. L. Venkataraman (deceased),
Village Administrative Officer (Retd),
Kothapetta, Krishnagiri Taluk.
2. Pachammal
3. Kalaivani
4. Alamelu
5. Bakkiyalakshmi
6. Anbarasi
7. Lakshmi Narayana Moorthy
(P2 to P7 are substituted as LRs of deceased
sole petitioner vide order dated 10.08.2026
made in WMP.No.29663/2026 in
WP.No.25134/2007 by TVKJ)
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Revenue Department,
Fort St. George, Chenani - 600 009.
2. District Collector,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
__________
Page1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
3. Revenue Divisional Officer,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
4. Tahsildar,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
entire records, leading to the issue of proceedings bearing Na.Ka.No.
8768/99/A dated 30.12.2003 and proceedings bearing Na.Ka.No.8768/89/A
dated 19.11.2004 on the file of the 3rd respondent Revenue Divisional
Officer, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District (formerly Dharmapuri District) and
quash the same and direct the respondents to make necessary corrections in
the petitioner’s date of birth to 25.07.1947 instead of 15.8.1941 in his
service register as per the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.6 of 2004
dated 19.01.2006 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Krishnagiri and
consequently restore the petitioner to service and allow him to retire by
superannuation on 24.07.2005 and grant the arrears of salary, the retirement
benefits and all other attendant benefits with 18% interest thereof due to the
petitioner.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Sridhar
For Respondent(s): Mr.C.P.Gowthaman,
Government Advocate
__________
Page2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
ORDER
The prayer in the writ petition is to call for the entire records leading
to the issuance of proceedings bearing Na.Ka.No.8768/99/A dated
30.12.2003 and proceedings bearing Na.Ka.No.8768/89/A dated 19.11.2004
on the file of the 3rd respondent, the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District (formerly Dharmapuri District), to quash
the same, and to direct the respondents to make the necessary corrections in
the petitioner’s service register, changing his date of birth to 25.07.1947
instead of 15.08.1941, as per the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.6 of
2004 dated 19.01.2006 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Krishnagiri.
Consequently, the petitioner seeks restoration to service, permission to retire
upon superannuation on 24.07.2005, and the grant of arrears of salary,
retirement benefits, and all other attendant benefits along with 18% interest
per annum.
2. It is the case of the deceased sole writ petitioner that he joined
service as a Village Administrative Officer on 09.08.1982. At the time of his
entry into service, his date of birth was recorded as 15.08.1941 based on his
school certificate. However, the petitioner claimed that his original date of
__________
Page3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
birth is 25.07.1947. He immediately submitted a representation to the
Department on 18.10.1982 to change his date of birth from 15.08.1941 to
25.07.1947. After submitting the said representation in 1982, he remained
silent. Thereafter, he filed a civil suit in O.S.No.62 of 1999, after a lapse of
17 years and obtained a decree on 08.06.1999.
3. Based on this Civil Court decree, his date of birth was initially
changed. Subsequently, the first appeal in A.S.No.76 of 1999 was filed,
which was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Civil Court.
Challenging this order of remand, C.M.A.No.1177 of 2000 was filed, which
confirmed the order, and the suit was subsequently dismissed on 30.12.2003.
Challenging the dismissal, the petitioner filed A.S.No.6 of 2004, which was
allowed on 19.01.2006. Following this, the present writ petition was filed
seeking the implementation of the decree for the alteration of his date of
birth.
4. The Government Advocate appearing for the respondents opposed
the petition on the ground that at the time of joining duty, the petitioner's
date of birth was recorded as 15.08.1941 based on his S.S.L.C. book. He
__________
Page4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
argued that even though the petitioner submitted a representation on
18.10.1982, he remained inactive until 1999, when he finally filed the suit.
The petitioner took no steps between 1982 and 1999, slept over his rights,
and suddenly woke up from his slumber to initiate litigation. He further
contended that the Civil Court decree cannot bind the writ jurisdiction for
claiming service benefits. He added that the petitioner was already allowed
to continue in service and receive a salary, which in itself was a concession,
and therefore prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Government Advocate
for the respondents.
6. There is no explanation from the writ petitioner as to why he did
not approach the Court immediately after 1982. The petitioner slept over the
issue and only approached the Civil Court in 1999. This delay of more than
17 years has remained completely unexplained. Merely because the
petitioner obtained a Civil Court decree for the alteration of his date of birth,
it does not automatically entitle him to a correction in his service records.
Fortunately for the petitioner, he was allowed to continue in service for a
__________
Page5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
certain period based on the altered date of birth, which itself constitutes a
significant concession. The petitioner is not entitled to anything beyond this
concession.
7. At this juncture, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to
the pendency of this writ petition, the respondents have not released the
petitioner's pensionary benefits and requested a direction from this Court to
that effect.
8. In view of the above, this Court passes the following orders:
a. The petitioner's date of birth shall be taken as 15.08.1941.
b. The respondents shall not pass any recovery order against the
petitioner based on the disposal of this writ petition.
c. The respondents are directed to release the entire pensionary benefits
due to the petitioner within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
__________
Page6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
9. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.
No costs.
26-10-2026
Index: Yes
Speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Sni
To
1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Revenue Department,
Fort St. George, Chenani - 600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
4.Tahsildar,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
__________
Page7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )
WP No. 25134 of 2007
KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN J.
Sni
WP No. 25134 of 2007
26-10-2026
__________
Page8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:54 pm )