Shimla (Himachal Pradesh) [India], August 20 (ANI): The Himachal Pradesh High Court just lately dismissed an attraction filed by a authorities worker, Satya, who sought correction of her date of start in official service information greater than 17 years after induction, holding that such requests on the fag finish of service can’t be entertained.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma, whereas saying its order on August 14, 2025, upheld an earlier judgment of a Single Judge who had rejected Satya’s plea for altering her date of start from January 6, 1969 to October 24, 1969.
The Bench famous that Satya had joined the Jal Shakti Vibhag as a Junior Engineer on April 25, 2000. However, her request for correction was made solely in July 2017–well past the two-year interval prescribed underneath Clause 7.1 of Chapter VII of the Himachal Pradesh Financial Rules, 1971.
Quoting the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India vs Harnam Singh (1993) and subsequent circumstances, the High Court reiterated that belated claims for alteration of date of start are barred, particularly when made in the direction of the top of service.
‘Such belated requests can’t be thought-about at this stage. The appellant is certain by her personal stand, having admitted throughout civil proceedings that she got here to know of the discrepancy solely in 2014. Therefore, she can not now fall again on a illustration allegedly made in 2002, which was by no means substantiated,’ the Bench noticed in its 37-page judgment.
The Court additionally identified that Satya had filed a civil swimsuit in 2015 for correction of her start information however didn’t implead her employer, a lapse which weakened her declare. The decree obtained towards the Education Board, the judges mentioned, didn’t entitle her to computerized correction of service information.
Rejecting arguments that the state failed to keep up information correctly, the High Court held that the appellant’s delay and laches have been deadly to her case. ‘The view taken by the realized Single Judge doesn’t endure from any infirmity or illegality warranting interference,’ the Division Bench dominated, dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal (LPA No.542 of 2025).
With this, the orders of the federal government authorities dated April 11 and May 19, 2023–refusing the correction–stand upheld. (ANI)