MOHAN RAJWAR Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved on issuance of letter No. 876 dated 05.07.2006 by the respondent No. 6, the Project Office, Rajapur, CCP/South Jharia, Kustore Area, BCCL, Dhanbad whereunder his age has illegally been sought to be changed at the fag end of his service ignoring the original entries of about 20 years back.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Auto Electrician on 08.01.1972 at Kustore Area Office of respondent Bharat Coking Coal Limited. His service excerpts were prepared and age was assessed by the Apex Medical Board being 30 years as on 07.08.1986. The respondents vide Office Order dated 06.05.1987 duly communicated the a assessed age to the petitioner, Annexure-2. The said date of birth, as assessed by the Apex Medical Board, was also entered into his service excerpts, identity card and other statutory records being 07.08.1956. The respondents also confirmed the same by Communication dated 07.04.1988, Annexure-4. Despite such finality, at the fag end of his service he was subjected to appear before Medical Board in the year 2006. The Medical Board opined his age to be between 55 to 60 years as on 24.04.2006 meaning thereby that date of birth of the petitioner was reassessed to be 24.10.1948 instead of 07.08.1956, Annexure-5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the same as being in teeth of the Implementation Instruction No. 76 and is arbitrary and unreasonable at the fag end of service and contrary to the admitted records being maintained by the respondents themselves on the basis of assessment of his age by an Apex Medical Board in the year 1986 itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the judgment of the Division Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Bihar Electricity Board Vs. Bihar Powers Workers Union & Others, 2000 3 PLJR 65 submits that where the age of employee have been assessed between 55 to 60 years by the Apex Medical Board at the fag end of his service, the employee should get benefit of minimum age as assessed by the Medical Board, which has not been done in the instant case. On the other hand, respondents have assessed the age in the middle of 55 of 60 years as per their wisdom, which is contrary to the judgments of the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the in the case of Bihar Electricity Board Vs. Bihar Powers Workers Union & Others, 2000 3 PLJR 65 as well as the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sunder Pandit Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi through Chairman & Ors., 2006 1 JCR 354.

(3.) The ground taken in the counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents is that if the petitioner was allowed to continue at his original date of birth, he would have continued in service for 44 years which would mean that he had entered in service even before 18 years of age. That is why reassessment was done and the respondents had adopted the age of employee, arriving average of 55 to 60 years, being 57 and 1/2 years in the impugned order by which his date of birth has been altered and fixed.