L NARAYANA Vs. VISAKHAPATNAM DOCK LABOUR BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these three writ petitions, a common issue as to the correction of the age of the petitioners who are employees of Visakhapatnam Dock Labour board has fallen for consideration, and therefore, these three writ petitions are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) In Writ Petition No. 6359/95, me petitioner claims mat he joined the respondent-unit on 1-5-1969 as Mazdoor and as on that day his age was shown as 34 years whereas his actual date of birth is 13-4-1945. According to his actual date of birth, he reaches the age of superannuation after completing 60 years of service only in the year 2005 and therefore, he is entitled to continue in service in the respondent-unit upto the year 2005 basing on the certificates issued by the mandal revenue officials.

(3.) In Writ Petition No. 6957/95, there are two petitioners who claim mat they joined the respondent-unit as Mazdoors in the year 1961. It is claimed that as per the service register, the date of birth of the first petitioner was recorded as June 1935 whereas his actual date of birth is 9-12-1943. As far as the second petitioner is concerned, his date of birth has been recorded as May, 1935 whereas his actual date of birth is 14-9-1943. According to these petitioners, they will attain the age of superannuation only in the year 2003 and therefore, seek a direction to continue them in me respondent-unit upto the year 2003 basing on the certificates issued by the mandal revenue officials.