HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15652 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Jainendra Pandey, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri Jitendra Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that the writ petitioner joined the post of Home Guard on 07.02.1985 and thereafter now by virtue of an order dated 30.06.2025 the writ petitioner was superannuated. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the date of birth of the writ petitioner is 20.06.1968, thus, the writ petitioner could not have been superannuated on 02.07.2025. Submission is that due to an error committed by the employers, the writ petitioner has been prematurely retired and in this regard, the petitioner had represented the matter raising objection in the month of April, 2025. 3. Prayer in the present petitioner is for a direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the writ petitioner and to quash the orders if any, so passed declaring the writ petitioner to be superannuated post completion of 60 years while retiring him from 02.07.2025. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has produced before this Court the instructions dated 16.10.2025 of the District Commandent, Home Guard, Ghazipur wherein an application for submitted by the writ petitioner disclosing the date of birth and time of the appointment/engagement was submitted wherein the date of birth of the writ petitioner was shown to be 20.06.1965 and there happens to be an extract of the service record that the date of birth of the writ petitioner is dated 20.06.1965. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jainendra Pandey, Rajneesh Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ram Vilas Ram .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. In the opinion of the Court, it is not open for the writ petitioner to claim correction of the date of birth at the fag end of his service career, law of this Court is well crystallized as the Hon'ble Apex Court in Hindustan Lever Limited Vs. S.M. Jadhav (2001) LawSuit (SC) 504 has observed as under.- "It is settled law that at the fag end of the career, a party cannot be allowed to raise dispute regarding his date of birth." 6. Since the writ petitioner had not raised the issue regarding correction of the date of birth within the time, thus, at the fag end of the career, it is not open for the writ petitioner to seek correction in the date of birth, thus, the writ petition has no merit. Accordingly, it is liable to the dismissed and is dismissed. October 17, 2025 Rajesh WRIA No. 15652 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad