JAGADISH PASHWAN Vs. CHAIRMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court for correction of his date of birth as 1947 instead of 1941, on the basis whereof he has been retired. By a letter dated 1st of June, 2001, contained in annexure "P-12" to this petition, the petitioner was retired with effect from 19th June, 2001. The petitioner has affirmed this writ petition on 24th Aug., 2001 almost one and a half months after his retirement. That apart, from the Original Service Book, produced by Mr. Banerjee, it appears that the date of birth has been recorded as 1941. The xerox copy of the Service Register at page 25 of the writ petition, on which reliance was placed by Mr. Batta, charyya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, differs from that of the Service Register, original of which has been produced before this Court by Mr. Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. The xerox copy does not contain any date and there are material difference in it. There is every likelihood for believing that this document is a forged one. Inasmuch as while annexing the order dated 12th July, 2001 the petitioner committed to annex the enclosures of the said document. In annexure "P-10" by which the petitioner's representation was considered reference was made to certain documents in which date of birth was recorded as 1941, a xerox copy whereof was annexed with the said order at least in 2 places of 2 copies. These clearly show that there must have been some surprising on the part of the petitioner.

(2.) Be that as it may, the petitioner has come not only at the fag end of the career but also after his retirement. Mr. Bhattacharya has relied on a decision in the case of The General Manager, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Vs. Shib Kumar Dushad, (2000) S.C.C. 696 in order to contend that in case of such dispute with regard to the age on the basis of National Coal Wage Agreement III employment instruction No. 76 being part of joint bi-partite committee for the coal industries, being annexure "P-7" to the writ application, it has to be referred to the Medical Board as was held in the said decision.

(3.) Mr. Banerjee, however, points out that in such a case unless there is a glaring discrepancy, it could not be referred to the Medical Board.