Correction of date of birth in service records at the fag end of service is unsustainable.

The petitioner was superannuated from service on July 31, 1992, based on the date of birth (DOB) of July 12, 1934, recorded in the service record

The petitioner contended that the correct DOB was July 12, 1936, or June 12, 1937, as reflected in educational documents and a subsequently issued Pension Payment Order (PPO)

A formal request for the correction of the DOB was first made by the petitioner on the actual date of retirement, July 31, 1992

The State respondents opposed the petition, asserting that an Audit Team inspection had discovered interpolations in the petitioner's service book regarding the DOB

Despite being issued a notice (Annexure R-3) to provide proof of the claimed DOB during his service, the petitioner failed to produce any evidence

The petitioner did not file a rejoinder to controvert these allegations of interpolation or the failure to respond to the audit notice

1. Whether a request for the correction of a date of birth in service records can be entertained when made at the "fag end" of an employee's career

2. Whether the petitioner provided conclusive evidence to warrant a correction of the service record despite allegations of interpolation

The court primarily relied on the principle that a request for change of date of birth at the "fag end" of service is unsustainable, as established in Bharat Coking Coal Limited and Ors. v. Shyam Kishore Singh (2020) 3 SCC 411

even if clear evidence exists, a correction cannot be claimed as a matter of right after a long delay, particularly when it affects the seniority and promotion of others as established in State of M.P. v. Premlal Shrivas (2011) 9 SCC 664

courts must be circumspect and cautious in entertaining such claims on the eve of superannuation as emphasized in State of Maharashtra v. Gorakhnath Sitaram Kamble (2010) 14 SCC 423

The court observed that the petitioner’s first request for DOB correction coincided exactly with his date of retirement, characterizing it as a "fag end" attempt

The court noted the respondents' uncontroverted evidence (Annexure R-3) showing that an audit had flagged interpolations in the service book and that the petitioner had previously ignored opportunities to establish his correct DOB

Applying the cited precedents, the court reasoned that the petitioner had "slept over his rights" for decades

The court highlighted that allowing such corrections after a delay of over twenty years is "ex facie fatal" to the case, as such changes have a "chain reaction" affecting the promotion prospects of junior employees

Since the petitioner failed to file a rejoinder to rebut the claims of interpolation or the audit findings, the court found no basis to grant relief

The court affirmed that a public servant cannot seek to alter their date of birth at the time of superannuation if they failed to act within a reasonable time during their service tenure

Relief for salary for the contested three-year period and terminal benefits was denied