Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010033272016 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7656/2016 BACHA SINGHA S/O. LT. BABATON SINGHA, R/O. GDAIN RAJI, HOFLONG, P.S. HAFLONG, DIST. MIMAHASAO, ASSAM, PIN-788819. VERSUS THE NC HILLS AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL, HAFLONG and 3 ORS. REP. BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEMBER, HAFLONG. 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY N N.C. HILLS AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL HAFLONG. 3:THE EXECUTIVE MEMBER IN CHARGE TRANSPORT N.C. HILLS AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL HAFLONG. 4:THE HEADMASTER SAMPAD RAM TAPASILLI HIGH SCHOOL P.O. SONAIMUKH DIST. CACHAR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R CHOUDHURY, MR. R ALI,MS. P GOHAIN Advocate for the Respondent : , SC, N C HILLS Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 08.12.2025 None appears for the petitioner on call. Ms. Tinlung, learned counsel for the respondents is present. The matter pertains to correction of date of birth of the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed as Electrician in the year 1981 and his date of birth is recorded as 02.04.1957 in the service book. According to the petitioner, his actual date of birth is 31.01.1962. The petitioner filed a representation on 24.02.2016 for correction of the date of birth, which was rejected by the respondent authorities on 07.03.2016, on the ground that as per F.R. & S.R. No.8 no alteration of date of birth can be allowed. On perusal of the record, the petitioner has approached the authority for correction of date of birth in the year 2016, after a lapse of 35 years. It is settled position of law that the correction of the date of birth cannot be allowed if it is made after long lapse of period. That apart, on the last to dates, i.e. 18.04.2022 and 28.05.2025, when the matter was listed, the petitioner remained un-represented which indicates that the petitioner is no longer interested to pursue this writ petition. Having considered above and applying the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited and Another –vs- M.C. Subramaniam Reddy reported in (2021) 2 SCC 27, the writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant