Introduction

Sri Saroj Kumar Bhattacharya v. Bengal Immunity Ltd. & Ors. is a notable judgment delivered by the Calcutta High Court on December 9, 1993. The case primarily revolves around the appellant's attempt to correct his date of birth as recorded in his employment records. The appellant, a long-serving employee and president of the Bengal Immunity Workers' Union, sought to amend discrepancies in his date of birth that had arisen due to conflicting declarations made during his employment tenure.

Summary of the Judgment

The appellant filed a writ petition seeking correction of his date of birth. Initially, his date of birth was recorded as March 21, 1935, based on his declaration upon joining the service in 1953. However, discrepancies arose when he provided differing dates in subsequent declarations and examination certificates. The management contested the authenticity of the appellant's claims to alter his date of birth. After scrutinizing the evidence, including disputed letters and declarations, the Calcutta High Court upheld the trial judge's decision to dismiss the petition, affirming that the appellant had not sufficiently proven the legitimacy of his request to amend his age in the records.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references the case of Dy. Commissioner of Police, Special Branch v. Bhupesh Chandra Karanjai & Moti Ranjan Bhattacharjee, reported in 1993 (II) CLJ 74. This precedent emphasized the importance of contemporaneous documents in validating an employee's date of birth. It highlighted that in the absence of such documents, corrections could only be made based on existing records without retrospective effect. The Calcutta High Court utilized this precedent to reinforce the stringent requirements for amending essential personal details in official records.

Legal Reasoning

The court meticulously examined the evidence presented by both parties. A central point was the authenticity of a letter purportedly from Shri G. Rai Verman, which the management contested as fraudulent. The court found no credible basis to accept the letter as genuine, noting inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence. Moreover, the appellant's failure to contest the management's affidavit or provide compelling evidence to support his claims weakened his position. The court underscored that retrospective corrections based on subsequent documents, especially those deemed non-contemporaneous like the School Final Certificate, were untenable.

Impact

This judgment reinforces the principle that corrections to fundamental personal information in employment records necessitate robust and contemporaneous evidence. It sets a clear precedent that late attempts to amend such details without solid proof are unlikely to succeed. Employers can rely on this judgment to maintain the integrity of their records, and employees are reminded of the importance of ensuring accurate declarations at the time of employment.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Conclusion

The Sri Saroj Kumar Bhattacharya v. Bengal Immunity Ltd. judgment serves as a pivotal reference for cases involving the correction of personal details in official records. It underscores the necessity of providing credible, contemporaneous evidence when seeking amendments and highlights the judiciary's role in upholding the integrity of employment records. Employers are thereby empowered to enforce strict verification processes, while employees are advised to ensure the accuracy of their declarations from the outset to avoid future disputes.