A request for change in date of birth by a professor set to retire in a few days has triggered a controversy at the University of Madras, with some Syndicate members raising a flag against the process followed.
S.L. Maheshwari, a professor in the Department of Pharmacology, applied for change in her date of birth from April 15, 1955 to February 15, 1957. As per the original date of birth, she will retire on May 31. If the change is effected, she would be eligible for two more years of service.
According to sources, University Registrar P. David Jawahar sent a circular to Syndicate members on May 20 with a resolution to alter Ms. Maheshwari’s date of birth in university records. As supporting evidence, the circular cited a report from the Commissioner of Revenue Administration that had recommended such an alteration.
Sources in the Syndicate said the circular was not clear on whether Ms. Maheshwari had got the birth date changed in her SSLC certificate. A few Syndicate members said the circular was ambiguous on when the application for change of date of birth was made.
“The rules mandate that such an application has to be made within five years from the entry into service. The circular does not clearly establish this,” says one Syndicate member.
In 2011, the apex court, ruling on a police constable’s plea to change his birth date after over two decades of service, said “no court or tribunal can come to the aid of those who sleep over their rights.” The change cannot be claimed as a matter of right if such an application is made after a lapse of time which was more than what was fixed by the employer.
“If such last minute changes are allowed, then many others could come back with similar claims just before superannuation,” a former Professor of the University said.
“Rules followed”
University authorities, however, said Dr. Maheshwari had followed the rules.
“Within two and a half years of her appointment she had applied for correction in her SSLC record. But over two-and-half decades her request was not taken up, and when it came to the university we told her that she must write to the government. She has received a letter from the government and we have placed her case before the Syndicate,” said the Registrar.
On why a circular was issued to the Syndicate instead of being taken up in the meeting, he said the Syndicate had met on May 15 and was not due to meet until June 12. “She will be retiring on May 30 and we require the members’ comments before proceeding,” the Registrar said.
