STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. ARUN KUMAR DHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was served with a notice of his retirement with effect from 30.09.2010 assuming that petitioner shall be deemed to have been appointed at the age of 18 years. The petitioner challenged the said communication superannuating the petitioner. The petitioner's writ petition was allowed vide order dated 08.03.2011 directing the respondents to accept the petitioner's actual and recorded date of birth. It has been held that petitioner will be continued in service and shall be paid the emoluments till he attains the age of superannuation according to his actual and recorded date of birth. This judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 08.03.2011 has been challenged before the Division Bench of this Court and matter has been referred to the Larger Bench by the Division Bench vide order dated 9th January, 2012. Hence, matter came up before this Court.

(2.) In this case, though arguments were heard but the respondent-State submitted that after conclusion of the arguments they will submit notification dated 28.05.1991, reference of which is given in the Full Bench judgment of the Patna High Court delivered in the case of Ragjawa Narayan Mishra Vs. The Chief Executive Officer, Bihar Rajya Khadi Gramoudyog Board & Others, 2006 1 PLJR 410. The said notification has not yet been submitted. There is reference of one circular of 1998 in the same judgment in para 16, copy of that circular is also not produced by either of the parties. Therefore, the matter is pending before this Court.

(3.) I.A. No. 1099 of 2013