CHANDAN THAKUR Vs. IISCO STEEL PLANT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Grievance of the writ petitioner as ventilated in the application relates to alleged wrong recording of his age/date of birth in the service record and respondent authority's refusal to rectify the same. The backdrop of the case may briefly be stated as follows:

(2.) Age of the petitioner was recorded as per estimation of the contractor as about 49 years. The respondent No. 6 after awarding a contract for a period of one year by letter dated 18.11.2006 approached the Concerned authority for renewal of photo gate pass of 27 workers i.e., for those who were working under him. The respondent No. 6 also sent a chart of workers in which the name, father's name, address and age of the workers were given. Name of the petitioner was there as against serial No. 17. The age of the petitioner was rightly recorded therein as 35 years in the year 2006. The authority concerned accordingly issued a photo pass in favour of the petitioner and it correctly records petitioner's date of birth as 21.12.1974. But unfortunately the petitioner's age had been wrongly recorded in the service record as 49 years in September, 2006.

(3.) The petitioner got himself medically examined in the Sub - Divisional Hospital on 31st January 2005. There his approximate and apparent age was given as between 32 to 34 years.