A belated claim to alter date of birth in service records cannot be considered after retirement.

The appellant was appointed as a Village Administrative Officer on 14 March 2001 and applied in 2005 to alter his date of birth in the service record.

He had earlier filed W.P. No. 3841 of 2005, in which the Court directed consideration of his representation.

The claim remained unresolved, and the appellant filed W.P. No. 27649 of 2019; the Single Judge’s order dated 6 March 2025 was challenged in this appeal.

The Division Bench recorded that the appellant’s retirement date was 31 December 2005 and described the application as having been made on the eve of retirement.

1. Whether the appellant’s claim to alter his date of birth in the service record could be considered after the passage of time and in light of its timing near retirement.

2. Whether the order dismissing the appellant’s writ petition warranted interference in the intra-court appeal.

The judgment cites no statute or precedent. It applies the principle that a claim to alter a date of birth in a service record, made on the eve of retirement and pursued after a substantial lapse of time, cannot be considered at that late stage.

The Court noted that the appellant sought alteration of his date of birth in 2005, near the recorded retirement date of 31 December 2005, and that the dispute remained unresolved before retirement.

Given the timing of the application and the subsequent delay, the Court held that the claim could not be considered at that stage. It therefore found no basis to disturb the order under appeal.

No costs were awarded.