Archive · 31 Oct 2025
Telangana HC Dismisses Plea to Alter Retirement Date Based on DOB Correction
Imagine someone who works at a company and is getting ready to retire.
They realize that if their birthday was a few years later, they could keep working longer.
So, they ask the company to change their birthday in the records.
The company says no, because they had already agreed to the birthday on file when they started working.
The employee then goes to court to try and force the change.
The High Court of Telangana looked at the case and decided to say no.
The judges explained that it's not fair to try and change your birthday right before you retire.
They also pointed out that the employee agreed to his age when he first started working, based on what a doctor said, and didn't have proof of his age back then.
The court also noted that the employee had already taken all his retirement money.
Because of these reasons, the court upheld the company's decision and dismissed the employee's request.
The Telangana High Court dismissed a former SCCL employee's appeal to change his date of birth.
The employee, Ch. Ram Reddy, sought to alter his birth date from June 5, 1956, to June 1, 1960.
This change would have extended his service by four years beyond his retirement in June 2016.
The court cited a legal principle that correcting date of birth at the end of service is generally not entertained.
The employee had previously accepted post-retirement benefits and his initial age was medically assessed.
- Who
- Ch. Ram Reddy, a former employee of Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL), and the Telangana High Court division bench.
- What
- The Telangana High Court dismissed an appeal by a former employee seeking to change his date of birth to extend his service beyond his retirement date.
- When
- Thursday, with the original retirement occurring on June 30, 2016.
- Where
- Telangana High Court.
- Why
- The court ruled that correction of date of birth at the end of service is generally not entertained, especially when service conditions do not permit it, and it involves disputed facts.
Employee's Stance
Court's Ruling
Date of Birth Correction
Employee's Stance
Argued for his date of birth to be corrected to June 1, 1960, based on SSC memo and transfer certificate, to gain additional years of service.
Court's Ruling
Dismissed the plea, stating that correction of date of birth at the fag end of service should not be ordinarily entertained and falls into disputed facts not for writ court determination.
Basis of Age Assessment
Employee's Stance
Sought to rely on SSC and transfer certificate for his date of birth.
Court's Ruling
Noted the employee was not a matriculate upon joining and accepted the age assessed by a medical officer (June 5, 1956) as he could not provide documentary proof at the time of joining.
Acceptance of Retirement Benefits
Employee's Stance
Sought to alter retirement date, implying dissatisfaction with current status.
Court's Ruling
Highlighted that the employee had already accepted all admissible post-retirement benefits as of his original retirement date.
- Court
- Telangana High Court
- Appellant
- Ch. Ram Reddy (Former SCCL Employee)
- Employer
- Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL)
- Original DOB Claim
- June 1, 1960
- Recorded DOB
- June 5, 1956
- Original Retirement Date
- June 30, 2016