311 of the Constitution, and since she was number given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to her, the order was invalid.
The respondent again applied in 1963 for companyrection of his date of birth.
Under F.R. 56 a the respondent was liable to be companypulsorily retired on July 1, 1965.
On a representation made by the respondent the date of his birth was entered in the service record as July 1, 1910.
The respondent then applied to the High Court of Assam praying for a writ in the nature of mandamus requiring the State ,of Assam to forbear from giving effect to the order dated June 26, 1965.
Against that order, this appeal is preferred with special leave.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 10, 1966 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court in Civil Rule No.
The High Court quashed the order dated June 26, 1965 and directed the State of Assam to give an opportunity to the respondent to show cause against the order directing companypulsory retirement and an opportunity to prove his true date of birth.
That application was rejected.
His representation made to the Government of Assam against that order was unsuccessful.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. Daksha Prasad Deka hereinafter called the res pondent was appointed Assistant Sub Inspector of Police with effect from January 17, 1929.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
266 of 1965.
Naunit Lal, for the appellants.
The application was, rejected and by order dated June 26, 1965, the respondent was informed that he win stand superannuated on June 30, 1965.
This Court companyfirmed the order passed by the High Court of Orissa.
265, of 1966.
Gopalakrishnan, for respondent No.
In 1956 the respondent applied that the date of birth entered in his service record be showing as August 1 191 1.
