Change of Date of Birth in Service Record – Supreme Court Judgment (2024 SCMR 459)

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Case Title and Citation
3. Background of the Case
4. Legal Question
5. Supreme Court’s Decision
6. Reasons for Rejection
7. Legal Principles
8. Conclusion
9. About Muhammad Amin, Advocate

---

1. Introduction

In 2024, the Supreme Court of Pakistan delivered an important ruling on a service-related dispute.
The case centered on an attempt by a government employee to revise his date of birth in official records after nearly four decades of service.
Ultimately, the Court rejected the plea, citing excessive delay and lack of legal justification.

---

2. Case Title and Citation

To better understand the context, here are the key details of the case:

• Case Title: State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan vs. Muhammad Rafique
• Case No.: Civil Petition No. 2367 of 2024
• Citation: 2024 SCMR 459
• Date of Judgment: 13 March 2024
• Judges: Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi

---

3. Background of the Case

Muhammad Rafique had joined the State Life Insurance Corporation in 1981.
At the time, the department entered his date of birth as 02.03.1960 in the official record.
However, in 2019—after serving for nearly 38 years—he claimed his actual date of birth was 02.03.1965.
Following the rejection of his correction request by the department, he filed a constitutional petition in 2020 to challenge the record.

---

4. Legal Question

The pivotal legal issue before the Court was:
Can a government employee lawfully seek to change their date of birth in service records after decades of inaction?

---

5. Supreme Court’s Decision

Upon review, the Supreme Court dismissed the employee’s petition.
The Justices held that the delay in filing the request was both unjustified and unreasonable.
Consequently, they concluded that the service record could not be altered at such a late stage.

---

6. Reasons for Rejection

Several critical factors led to the dismissal:

• First, the petitioner had waited nearly 40 years before initiating any action.
• Second, he made no effort to dispute the original entry when he began his employment.
• Third, he presented no evidence of a clerical error or fraudulent entry.
• Moreover, the Court emphasized that personal claims must comply with procedural rules and time limits.
• Finally, it stressed the principle of finality in maintaining accurate and stable public service records.

---

7. Legal Principles

The judgment reaffirmed several established legal principles:

• Employees bear the responsibility to verify and confirm their records at the time of appointment.
• Legal remedies are not available for claims made after unreasonable delays.
• Courts remain cautious in allowing retrospective corrections in official documents.
• Ensuring certainty and consistency in service matters supports administrative fairness and good governance.

---

8. Conclusion

This landmark ruling reinforced the integrity of public service recordkeeping.
The Supreme Court made it clear that delayed claims—particularly those made after decades—do not hold legal merit.
Therefore, government employees must act diligently and correct any discrepancies in personal data early in their careers.

---

9. About Muhammad Amin, Advocate

Muhammad Amin, Advocate, is a seasoned legal professional based in Zeb Plaza, University Road, Peshawar.
He provides high-quality legal services both locally and internationally through online channels.
His areas of expertise include civil litigation, family law, taxation, SECP company registration, and service matters.
With over seven years of active legal practice, he delivers well-drafted legal documents and offers strong courtroom representation.
For legal consultation or case handling, you can contact him directly at 0313 9708019.