As per case facts, the respondent, upon entering service with a certain date of birth, later sought to correct it to an earlier date. This application was initially rejected by ... the authorities but subsequently allowed by the Tribunal, which directed his continued employment beyond his original superannuation date. The appellant, while appealing the Tribunal's decision to the Supreme Court, reinstated the respondent under threat of contempt proceedings. The question arose whether belated claims for date of birth correction, supported by evidence like horoscopes or oral statements, should be accepted when initial service entry records were based on available school registers. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that such evidence is not reliable at a belated stage for date of birth correction. The Court upheld the original date of superannuation for computing retirement benefits, while also directing that the amounts paid to the respondent during the period of extended service due to the Tribunal's order should not be recovered.