In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has reinforced the principle that an employer cannot unilaterally alter the recorded date of birth (DOB) of a government employee beyond a prescribed five-year period from the date of initial appointment. This decision underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the protection of employees' rights within the public service framework.
The case in question involved a petitioner who joined government service in 1987, submitting all requisite documents, including proof of her date of birth. An identity card issued to her on April 8, 2005, recorded her DOB as October 16, 1967, consistent with her submitted records. Her employment was regularized in 2009, and a service book was duly maintained. However, in 2024, during a routine scrutiny of service records, the employer discovered a discrepancy, asserting that her DOB should be October 16, 1965, and proceeded to amend the service book accordingly, with approval from the Deputy Inspector General of Correctional Services.
The petitioner challenged this unilateral alteration, contending that her DOB had been correctly recorded based on authentic documents submitted at the time of her appointment. She argued that the employer's action, taken decades after her initial appointment, was arbitrary and violated established procedures. The employer, in defense, cited a government memorandum dated January 24, 2012, which stipulates a five-year window from the date of joining for any corrections to an employee's DOB to be entertained. Based on this memorandum, the employer justified the rejection of the petitioner's plea to retain her originally recorded DOB.
Justice Aniruddha Roy, presiding over the case, examined the facts and the applicable legal framework. The court emphasized that the employer's action to alter the petitioner's DOB after such an extended period was not only procedurally flawed but also contravened the principles of natural justice. The court noted that the petitioner had consistently maintained her DOB as October 16, 1967, throughout her service, and the employer had accepted this without objection for over three decades.
The court further highlighted that the 2012 government memorandum clearly delineates a five-year limitation period for any corrections to an employee's DOB, starting from the date of initial appointment. This provision aims to ensure administrative certainty and prevent arbitrary alterations that could adversely affect employees' service conditions and retirement benefits. By acting beyond this stipulated period, the employer not only breached the memorandum's guidelines but also undermined the petitioner's legitimate expectations and rights accrued over years of service.
In its judgment, the court held that the employer's unilateral alteration of the petitioner's DOB was invalid and directed the restoration of her original DOB as October 16, 1967, in all official records. The court also underscored the necessity for employers to adhere strictly to established procedures and timelines when making changes to fundamental service records, to uphold the integrity of administrative processes and protect employees from undue prejudice.
This ruling serves as a critical reminder to government employers about the sanctity of service records and the legal obligations surrounding their maintenance. It reinforces the principle that any changes to such records must be made within the prescribed timeframes and through proper channels, ensuring transparency, fairness, and respect for employees' rights. The decision also provides reassurance to public servants that their service records, once duly verified and accepted, cannot be arbitrarily altered, safeguarding their career progression and retirement entitlements.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.