K M V S KUMAR V. UNION OF INDIA,SCY,FINANCE,NEW DELHI,AND 2

WP/11808/2016

AI Insights

The case involves K.M.V.S. Kumar, an Income Tax Officer, who sought to correct his date of birth recorded in official documents from 13.06.1956 to 13.12.1957, as per a civil court decree. The correction was initially denied by the respondents on the grounds of delay, leading to the filing of an application with the Central Administrative Tribunal, which was also dismissed. The petitioner then approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Tribunal's decision and the respondents' rejection of his application. The High Court, after hearing the arguments, dismissed the writ petition, agreeing with the Tribunal's decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 725721 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GADI KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: K R K V PRASAD
• Keywords: Central Administrative Tribunal; Date of birth correction; Income Tax Officer; Superannuation; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 226

Judgement Text

"IN THE H{GH COURT FOR AT HYI (s pec ia r .,,riIffi.FFJ,oF TELANG ANA IT]^D1Y, THE THIRT|ETH DAY oF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI [ 3318 l AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITtoNNO 11808 OF 2016 Between: K.M.V.S.KUMAR, S/o Naoabhushanam, aged 59 ),,ears, Occ: lncome Tax Officer ward - 11(a) 0/o The Adiitionar c\";;i.;ffi.\"\"riil.\" Tax, Ranse_11, 5D. sth Floor, tncome rax rowers. 1,r3=q .r!;k, -iyll#jilny\" H.No. 1 I _s_1 60, Bhavani Nagar, Moosapet, Hyderabad_s00 01g. ' -'----' I AND ...PETIT|oNER 1. UNION OF lNDlA, reoresented by the Secretary, Government of lndia. Ministry of Finance. oebt. or R.;\";L;';\"\";t;\"jE;k of Direct raxes, North Block, New Dethi-l 10 00t . 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner OJ lncorne Tax,, Andhra pradesh & Telangana, 1,th Floor. lncorne Tax fo,r*o, nC-C*iOs, HyderabaO-so. 004. t Ii:i:;:'J'\" r,, rhe centra I ea, i \" ri,rii,1i,ii\", n\"#n vooi b\"d B;;\"1: \" \" \"- . petition under Arricre 226- of the constitution of rndia ,r\"Ti\":t?Lfi-,1: circumstances stated in^the ,marrii-fit\"J'in\"ilir,tn, ,n\" High Cou( mav be pleased ro issue a writ' order or airection morlirrti\"rrr.ry one in the natuie of Certiorari by ca,ino for the order;;il m.o,.rfi6 in o.A.No., 21 I 0o726 ot 2015 on the fite of rl:.-991t.\"f nOrniiniSoti* Tribunat, Hyderabad and proceedings F.No.pr.ccrr/86/Estt12014, o\"Lo tis.oe.z015 and decrare the action of the 2nd respondent.in \"94;;;irgiire-request of the petitioner for change of date of birth as illegal, \"nir.i' I.Oiiirry, discriminatory and is in violation of the raw and set asideino qri\"n'rc \"aii orter oateo 26.o2.2016 and 'proceedings dated 05.03.201s and conseq*\"1y-air\"\"t the respondents to arter the date of birth of the petition\"r rs rg.i2.id6z*insteao of considerins it as 13.06.1956 and continue_the petitionei;;*;il tiil he attains rhe iqe of superannuation i.e., 31 -12.2017 with a, cons€quentiat oenetits.\"-\" - ii'v u.,u r l.A. No; 1.9F 2oi6(WpMp. wO: t,$as oizo-ibi petition unde, se.tionlETtFdpEii6 that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fited in suoport of the fiitio;: if,\" iign Court may be pteased to direct the respondenrs to'.iontinue itrJ;il;#; service titt the writ petirion is decided o-r lill 31.12.2017, whichever is'errfe..-' \"' .^ uounsel for the petitioner : SRI K.R.K.V.PRASAD Counset for the Respondents: SRt GAOI pnAViEf.f KUMAR, rhe court made the fouowing: SEBEI tt\"clroR GENERAL oF INDIA THE IION'BLE SRI JUSTICELABHIN AND KIJMAR SIIAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAP'U RAJESITWAR RAO Writ Petition No.118O8 of2OL6 ORDER : (Per Hon'bte Si Justice Abhinand Kumar Shauili) This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner under Arncle-226 of the Constitution of India seeking a 'Writ of Certiorari'by calling for records relating to the order passed by the Centrai Administrative Tribunal (for short, the Tribunal'), Hyderabad in O.A.No.O2ll00726 of 2015, dated 26.02.20 16 and to quash the same. 2. Heard Mr. K.R.K.V.Prasad, learned counsel for i petitioner and the learned Deputy Solicitor GenerAl of India appearing for resPondents- 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that ttre petitioner was appointed as 'Income Tax Ofhcer' and at the time of his entry, his date of birth was entered incorrectly as 13.06.1956 instead of 13.12.1957. The petitioner has further contended that he has hled O.S.No.294 of 1981 before the Principal / I : t I a : : i i t I i l I ! a l A(s,J & RRN,J wp_I1808 2016 District Munsif, Eluru seeking correction of date of birth from 13.06.1956 to I3.L2.t957 and the said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner vide orders, dated 28.09.1981 and the petitioner has submitted an application to correct his date of birth to tlre respondents from 13.06. 1956 to 13.L2.L957 in terms of the decree passed by the Competent Civil Court and the respondents have rejected the said application vide orders, dated 05.03.20 15 contending that the application seeking correction of date of birth was not submitted within hve (5) years and at a belated stage. Aggrieved by the said rejection orders, the petitipner I has approached the Tribunal by iitire O.A.No.O2 1/00726 of 2015 and the Tribunal was pleased to dismiss the O.A. vide orders, dated 26.02.2016 without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioner. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition by setting aside the rejection orders passed by the respondents on 05.03.2O15 and also orders passed by , li ,i ll i AKs,J & RRN,J 1r'p I 1808_2016 the Tribuna-l ln O.A.No.021l00726 of 2015, dated 26.02.2016 and allow the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondents had contended that the petitioner has approached the respondents at the fag end of his career seeking correction of date of birth and though the Competent Civil court has passed decree way back in 1991. He has not taken any steps to hle an application seeking correction of date of birth at the earliest point of time. Since, it is only at the fag end of career of the petitioner, seeking correction of date of birth is not permissible and the Tribunal was pleased to disrhiss the O.A. Therefore, there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by both the parties, is of the view that the petitioner though obtained a decree way back in 1991 from the Competent Civil Court, he has not 3 { I I I taken any steps to see that his date of birth is AKs,J & RRN,J wp-118O8_2O16 corected at the earliest point of time. Since, he is seeking correction of date of birth at the fag end of his career, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the O.A. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the orders passed by the Tribunal. 6. With these observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. 4 //TRUE COPY// SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANIEEGISTRAR (1O sEcTrou oFFrcER To I I dd 1. One CC to SRI K.R.K.V.PRASAD, Advocate. [OPUCI 2. One CC to Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General Of I Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. IOPUC] 3. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP/ (./ ia, High t I HIGH COURT DATED:301OG12023 ORDER 1EL4 j t'.', s s iY ,|, o * WP.No.11808 of 20'16 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS v "