501_WP_15870_2025.DOC Prasad IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 15870 OF 2025 Sahebrao Chandrasing Deore ...Petitioner Versus The Block Education Officer Panchayat Samiti & Ors. ...Respondents _______ Mr. Avinash Avhad a/w Purva Pradhan, for the Petitioner. Ms. Priyanka Chavan, AGP for Respondent – State. Mr. Rohit Sakhdeo for Respondent No.3. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE: 23rd SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. 1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondents to correct his date of birth in his service book to 1st June 1970. 2. The Petitioner, a primary teacher in the Zilla Parishad, Nashik, states that his date of birth is 1st June 1970, as documented in his birth certificate, school leaving certificate, S.S.C. certificate, PAN card, and driving licence. He further states that his service book initially recorded the same date. In August 2023, he discovered that the entry had been altered to read 1st June 1969. On 29th August 2023, he filed a complaint to the Panchayat Samiti Malegaon. Upon observing the tampering with the birth date, the Block Education Officer, Malegaon, submitted a 501_WP_15870_2025.DOC proposal dated 20th September 2023 for correction of the date of birth. Subsequently, by communication dated 2nd November 2023, Respondent No. 2, the Education Officer (Primary), declined the proposal on the sole ground that, pursuant to Rule 38(2) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, an application to amend the recorded date of birth filed after five years from the date of entry into service generally should not be entertained. Thereafter, the Block Development Officer of Panchayat Samiti, Malegaon, submitted a new proposal dated 6th December 2023, accompanied by the Petitioner’s supporting documents. Following a further complaint from the Petitioner, Respondent No. 2 issued a notice dated 10th March 2025. The notice scheduled a hearing for 18th March 2025 and instructed the relevant officials to attend with the original service book. No decision has been taken since. 3. Heard Mr Avinash Avhad, learned counsel for the Petitioner; Mr Rohit Sakhadeo, learned counsel for Respondent No. 2; and Ms Priyanka Chavan, learned AGP for Respondent No. 3 – State, and perused the record with their assistance. 4. Respondent No. 2’s notice dated 10th March 2025, includes two photocopies of the initial page of the Petitioner’s service book. One shows his date of birth as 1st June 1970, while the other shows that the date has been overwritten to read 1st June 1969. Additionally, the notice records that each of the five documents produced by the Petitioner shows 1st June 1970. Therefore, the Petitioner is not submitting a belated request to amend the date of birth recorded at 501_WP_15870_2025.DOC the time of his entry into service. His contention is that the original entry was subsequently altered. The communication dated 2nd November 2023 does not directly address this issue; instead, it relies solely on the five-year limitation period and treats the matter as a request to modify the original entry. Whether the original entry was tampered with, and the implications if it was, are factual questions. The competent authority is responsible for making this determination after examining the original service book. We are told that the Respondent No. 2 has commenced this process by scheduling a hearing. 5. In the circumstances, the following order is passed: (a) Respondent No. 2, the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nashik / the competent authority is directed to decide the proposal dated 6th December 2023 and the Petitioner’s complaint dated 10th March 2025 within a period of six weeks from today. (b) Respondent No. 2 shall decide the matter without being influenced by the communication dated 2nd November 2023 from the Education Officer (Primary). (c) The decision shall be communicated to the Petitioner within one week of its being made. 6. All contentions of the parties are kept open. 7. The Writ Petition is allowed in the above terms. No order as to costs. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) PRASAD RAJENDRASING RAJPUT Digitally signed by PRASAD RAJENDRASING RAJPUT Date: 2026.09.28 18:22:55 +0530