[2025:RJ-JP:11178] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3564/2012 Jagdishi Devi wife of Late Shri Radhe Shaym Sharma, aged about 56 years, Resident of Village and post Jawanpura, Tehsil Viratnagar District Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Rajasthan through Director, Bal Vikas Pariyogna Samaykit Bal Vikas, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur 2. Bal Vikas Pariyogna Adhikari (Berat), Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jag Mohan Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajay Verma for Mr.Akash Gaur-Dy.G.C. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 11/03/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for making necessary correction with regard to the date of birth of the petitioner in her service record and she be reinstated back in service. 2. Contents of the writ petition indicate that the petitioner was appointed as Sahayogani and she stood retired after attaining the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years on 19.01.2012. After retirement, she submitted an application before the respondents that her date of birth has been mentioned in service record as 14.09.1955 which is factually incorrect as per the Voter ID issued by the Election Commission of India. [2025:RJ-JP:11178] (2 of 2) [CW-3564/2012] 3. It appears that before approaching this Court, a representation was submitted by the petitioner for doing the needful exercise but when no action was taken by the respondents, the petitioner approached this Court with the aforesaid prayer. 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner was given appointment on the post of Sahayogani on the basis of the requisite documents with regard to the date of birth furnished by her. It appears that the petitioner kept mum till the date of her retirement and after retirement, she woke-up and submitted the application for making correction in her service record. 5. The disputed question of facts are involved in this petition with regard to the correctness of the date of birth of the petitioner, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court under its inherent jurisdiction contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. In view of the above, the present petition stands dismissed on this count alone, however, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the competent Court of law for re-determination and declaration with regard to her correct date of birth. 7. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/51