SUHRID RANJAN DASGUPTA Vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decision of the Steel Authority of India Limited, Rourkela Steel Plant, communicated in letter dated March 20, 1996 (Annexure-4) superannuating the petitioner from service with effect from March 31, 1997 has been challenged in this writ petition on the ground that his actual date of birth is March 16, 1941 and not March 16, 1939.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he entered into service of Rourkela Steel Plant as a Khalasi in June, 1960 and continued as such till the year 1968. While he was working as such, he was arrested in connection with Township P. S. Case No. 333 dated August 29, 1968 under Section 14 of the Foreigner Act read with Sections 471 /474 of the Indian Penal Code. He was placed on trial in S.T. Case No. 11/19 of 1969 to face the aforesaid charges. He was acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh. In the certificate of registration granted to him under the Citizenship Act, 1955 on February 6, 1971 his age was mentioned as 29 years 3 months and 21 days which means that his date of birth is March 16, 1941. In the Descriptive Roll of the Rourkela Steel Plant his date of birth was noted as February 16, 1939 and on that basis he could not have been superannuated as his actual date of birth is March 16, 1941 and the date of superannuation would be March 16, 2001.

(3.) The opposite parties have filed counter affidavit wherein it has been stated that a fact-finding enquiry was conducted to determine the date of birth of the petitioner. The Enquiring Officer examined the materials on record and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner has concluded that his date of birth should be taken as March 27, 1939 which he himself originally declared. The authority accepted the report and on that basis decided to superannuate him with effect from March 31, 1997.