# UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. MRS. SAROJ BALA

- **Citation:** [1995] Supp. 6 S.C.R. 656
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1995-12-13
- **Case number:** Civil appeal No. 12073 of 1995
- **Bench:** K. Ramaswamy, B.L. Hansaria
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/union-of-india-ors-v-mrs-saroj-bala-13705
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Service Law :
Date of Birth-Correction of-Application for-Filed after 18-1!2
C
years-~entral Administrative Tiibunal directed correction of date of
bi1th-Held: It was unthinkable that having remained in service for 18 years
the applicant discovered that her date of birth was wron15ln the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was wholly unjustified in directing co"ection of
date of birth.
D
The resJJonrlent had ap1icarcd for All India Civil Services Examination wherein she had annexed her school record in which her date of birth
was recorded as AJJril 4, 1949. On the basis of the selection in the competitive examination, she was selected for All India Revenue Service (Income·
Tax). She aJJproached the University for correction of her date of birth to
E be AJJril 5, 1950. 111e University had rejected the same. The respondent
then filed an application for correction of the date of birth which was
rejected by the Government. Thereafter, the resJJondent filed a petition in
the Central Administrative Tribunal for correction of her date of birth.
The Tribunal allowed the petition. Aggrieved by the Tribunal's judgment
F
the aJJpellants preferred the present appeal.
Allowing the appeal, this Court
HELD : 1.1. The respondent's parents are not illiterate. She is well
educated. She comJJeted in All India Civil Services Examination. Her date
G of birth was registered in the University to be April 4, 1949. On that basis,
she appeared for the examination aud she was selected. The said date has
been entered in the service record and remained undisputed for 18-1/2
years. [ 658-C]
1.2. It is unthinkable that having been born in an educated family
H and having remained in service for 18 years she discovered that her date
656
U.0.1. v. SAROJ BALA
657
of birth would be wrong. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal was A
wholly unjustified and obviously illegal in allowing the application and
directing correction of the date of birth. [658-D]

## Text

A
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
v.
MRS. SAROJ BALA
DECEMBER 13, 1995
B
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]
Service Law :
Date of Birth-Correction of-Application for-Filed after 18-1!2
C
years-~entral Administrative Tiibunal directed correction of date of
bi1th-Held: It was unthinkable that having remained in service for 18 years
the applicant discovered that her date of birth was wron15ln the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was wholly unjustified in directing co"ection of
date of birth.
D
The resJJonrlent had ap1icarcd for All India Civil Services Examination wherein she had annexed her school record in which her date of birth
was recorded as AJJril 4, 1949. On the basis of the selection in the competitive examination, she was selected for All India Revenue Service (Income·
Tax). She aJJproached the University for correction of her date of birth to
E be AJJril 5, 1950. 111e University had rejected the same. The respondent
then filed an application for correction of the date of birth which was
rejected by the Government. Thereafter, the resJJondent filed a petition in
the Central Administrative Tribunal for correction of her date of birth.
The Tribunal allowed the petition. Aggrieved by the Tribunal's judgment
F
the aJJpellants preferred the present appeal.
Allowing the appeal, this Court
HELD : 1.1. The respondent's parents are not illiterate. She is well
educated. She comJJeted in All India Civil Services Examination. Her date
G of birth was registered in the University to be April 4, 1949. On that basis,
she appeared for the examination aud she was selected. The said date has
been entered in the service record and remained undisputed for 18-1/2
years. [ 658-C]
1.2. It is unthinkable that having been born in an educated family
H and having remained in service for 18 years she discovered that her date
656
U.0.1. v. SAROJ BALA
657
of birth would be wrong. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal was A
wholly unjustified and obviously illegal in allowing the application and
directing correction of the date of birth. [658-D]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil appeal No. 12073 of
1995.
From the Judgment and Order dated 6.1.92 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in O.A. No. 1043-CH of 1991.
K. Lahiri, P. Parmeshwaran, T.V. Ratnam and S.N. Terdol for the
Appellants.
R.S. Suri for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted.
B
c
D
We have heard the counsel for both the parties. The respondent has
appeared in the year 1971 for the All India Civil Services Examination
wherein she had annexed her school record in which her date of birth was
recorded as April 4, 1949. On the basis of the selection in the competitive
examination, she was selected for All India Revenue Service (income· Tax) E
in the year 1972 and she joined the service in the said year, On June 18,
1985, she approached the University for correction of her date of birth to
be April 5, 1950. The University by its proceedings dated October 13, 1986
had rejected the same. The respondent then filed an application on
February 5, 1991 for correction of the date of birth which was rejected by ·
the Government on April 4, 1991. Thereafter the respondent filed O.A. in
the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh. By the impugned order
dated 6.1.1992, the Tribunal held that the date of birth of the respondent
is April 5, 1950 and directed correction of her date of birth in the service
record within the time specified in the order. Thus this appeal by special
leave.
Shri R.S. Suri, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent,
contended that the birth certificate given by the Registrar do indicate that
her date of birth is April 5, 1950 and that the mother had filed an affidavit
F
G
in support thereof. It is also sought corroboration from the date of birth
certificate of her elder sister and due to close proximity of six months H
658
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.
A between the birth of two children, it would not be possible that the
respondent would have been born. He also relied upon the horoscope to
prove her date of birth.
We are wholly unable to appreciate the stand of the respondent. The
respondent's parents are not illiterate. She is a well educated one she
B competed in All India Civil Services Examination. Her date of birth was
registered in the University to be April 4, 1949. On that basis, she appeared
for the examination, sought selection and accordingly she was selected. The
said date has been entered in the service record and remained undisputed
for 18-1/2 years. Subsequently it appears that she discovered in a talk with
C her sister that her date of birth is incorrect. Then enquiries were made and
birth certificate obtained which mentioned the birth of the child and the
parentage of the respondent. Horoscope was also sought to be set up to
corroborate those circumstances.
It is unthinkable that having been born in an educated family and
D
having remained in service for 18 years she discovered that her date of
birth would be wrong. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal was wholly
unjustified and obviously illegal in allowing the application and directing
correction of the date of birth. Though Mr. Suri sought to bring to our
notice that she made her representation in the year 1981, it is of little
E importance for disposal of the matter on merits.
The order of the tribunal is set asdie. The Appeal is allowed. No
costs.
v.s.s.
Appeal allowed.