HYDERABAD: The bench of ACJ Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice Shameem Akther was dealing with an appeal by Ch Chinnakishore Venukoti of Warangal district against the order of a single judge.
The case of the appellant-petitioner was that his father had given wrong date of birth at the time of his school admission where it was mentioned as September 4, 1982 instead of May 4, 1982.
He made an application in 2016 for correction of his date of birth stating that he is preparing for civil services examination for which the upper age limit is 35 years.
The government authorities rejected the request as the application for correction was made after a lapse of 19 years. Challenging the same, he filed a petition before the High Court and a single judge dismissed the plea saying that the petitioner completed post graduation on the basis of date of birth mentioned in the school records.
“He cannot attribute lack of knowledge; the petition was filed only when he realised that he would be crossing the maximum age prescribed by UPSC for attending civil services examination. Based on the date of birth recorded in the school records, the petitioner has taken several steps, therefore, no direction can be given in the present case, based on those birth certificates, after lapse of 19 years. Law will come to the rescue of the diligent but not an indolent”, the judge observed.
Aggrieved with the same, he filed an appeal before the division bench contending that the statutory register maintained under the Births and Deaths Act has to be given credence over the date of birth mentioned in the school records; when there is a conflict on the issue credibility should be given to the date of birth register, he said and urged the bench to set aside the order of the single judge. On the other hand, the government counsel pointed out that an application by the appellant-petitioner was filed with a delay of 19 years, hence his plea cannot be considered.
As per GO 430 dated December 31, 1992, the period allowed to file an application to change or alter the date of birth is three years. In fact, there are number of decisions of the Supreme Court not to accept the request of belated applicants, he noted. After hearing the case and perusing the material on record, the bench found that the appellant-petitioner had given the said date of birth ie. May 4, 1982 from the day one of his joining the school till completion of his post-graduation, and had made an application for correction in 2016.
“In an intra-court appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent, interference is justified only if the order under appeal suffers from a patent illegality. There are no merits in the present appeal”, the bench said while dismissing the appeal.