- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2164 RP No. 13 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA REVIEW PETITION NO. 13 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF MYSORE (NOW, STATE BANK OF INDIA) REGION-1, BANGALORE ZONE-2, B.K.G. COMPLEX, AVENUE ROAD GROUND FLOOR, BENGALURU-560 009 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF MYSORE (NOW, STATE BANK OF INDIA) DODDABALLAPURA BRANCH PIN-561203 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. T P MUTHANNA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. PRASAD B R S/O LATE RAJU B.S., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 194/A, CHIKKERE STREET, FORT ARAKALGUD-573 102, HASSAN DISTRICT ALSO AT STATE BANK OF INDIA RBO-06, AO-02, NW-01 SURYA ASPIRE, 1ST FLOOR DEVANAHALLI BYEPASS ROAD DEVANAHALLI-562110 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.R.SRINIVASAN., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2164 RP No. 13 of 2025 THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC R/W RULE 39 OF WRIT PROCEEDING RULES, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 12.09.2023 IN W.P. NO. 18390/2010(S-RES) PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. This review petition is filed seeking for review of the order dated 12.09.2023 passed in WP.No.18390/2010. 2. By the said order, this Court had directed the writ petitioner to be reinstated into service forthwith and in addition, this Court granted 10% backwages. This Court directed reinstatement since it was stated that the writ petitioner was still entitled to be in service and had not attained the age of superannuation. 3. However, the review petition is filed stating that the writ petitioner’s date of birth as indicated in his application for recruitment was 26.06.1958 and therefore, by the time the order was passed on - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2164 RP No. 13 of 2025 12.09.2023, he had already attained the age of superannuation. 4. It is also not in dispute that the Bank and the respondent had preferred Writ Appeal No.245/2024 and the Division Bench also dismissed the appeal and thereby confirmed the order passed by this Court. 5. Even before the Division Bench, it was not highlighted that the writ petitioner had attained the age of superannuation by the time the order was passed on 12.09.2023 by this Court. 6. It is also submitted that in compliance with the order, the writ petitioner though had attained the age of superannuation was actually reinstated and has worked for six months and for the said period of six months, salary has also been credited to his account. In support of said fact, learned counsel for the Bank has produced the copy of the letter addressed to the writ petitioner and also the statement of bank account of the writ petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2164 RP No. 13 of 2025 7. In light of the above, it is clear that since the writ petitioner had recorded his date of birth as 26.06.1958 while seeking recruitment, he would be bound by the said date and he cannot seek for consideration of his date of birth as 26.12.1961 which he secured by virtue of a decree obtained just before he joined service. 8. It is not in dispute that the request of the writ petitioner to change his date of birth from 26.06.1958 to 26.12.1961 was not acceded to by the Bank and the records continued to record it as 26.06.1958 and his date of superannuation will have to be computed with reference to that date i.e., 26.06.1958 only. 9. It is therefore obvious that there is an error apparent on the face of the record and consequently, the order directing the writ petitioner to be reinstated is modified and it is held that the writ petitioner would - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2164 RP No. 13 of 2025 be entitled to only backwages of 10% and not for reinstatement. 10. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner that 10% backwages as awarded has not been paid. 11. However, learned counsel for the Bank submits that this amount has been paid. He also submits that by virtue of the order passed now holding that the writ petitioner’s date of birth is 26.06.1958, any further arrears, if any, would be calculated and paid. The said statement is placed on record. Review Petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20