MAHENDRA PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavits filed in this case. In this matter, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the two supplementary affidavits filed on 2-2-1995. As those supplementary affidavits were filed without obtaining leave of this Court, I am not taking into consideration the contents of those affidavits while passing the following order. However, in my view, this matter should be disposed of finally at the admission stage.

(2.) The grievance of the writ petitioner is that his date of birth which has been recorded on the basis of certain documents in the records of the erstwhile employer Mohini Sugar Mill has not been followed by the respondents authorities, namely, Bihar State Sugar Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the said Corporation) while passing the impugned order of retirement.

(3.) The case of the petitioner, as it appears from the writ petition, is that his date of birth is 29-3-1941 and in support of that the petitioner has filed a declaration and nomination form under the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 with the writ petition. Such form is signed by the Managing Director, Warisaliganj Co-operative Sugar Mills where the petitioner was working prior to the order of his retirement. From the impugned order of retirement it appears that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service till he reaches the age of 60 years and if the date of birth of the petitioner as 29-3-1941 is accepted, in that event, the petitioner will continue to remain in service till 29-3-2001 whereas the petitioner has been made to retire with effect from 1-8-1993 under the impugned order as contained in Annexure-4.