TELU RAM Vs. P.S.E.B.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length.

(2.) Earlier the petitioner had secured employment with Beas Sutlej Link Project giving his date of birth as 10.12.1946. He had got employment on 11th December, 1966. That would make him 17 years of age on the date he secured the job. He was, therefore, not eligible for employment. The petitioner subsequently applied for a job with the respondent-Board by giving his date of birth as 11.11.1949. This according to the petitioner is his correct date of birth. The petitioner thereafter made an application for protection of his pay on the basis that he had been earlier employed with Beas-Sutlej Link Project. At that time, the respondent discovered the mis-representation made by the petitioner to the earlier employer. They have now directed retirement of the petitioner by accepting his date of birth as 11.12.1946.

(3.) We are of the considered opinion that no injustice has been done to the petitioner. A dishonest person cannot and should not be granted discretionary relief by the High Court in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Dismissed.