RAM PYARE SINGH Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 28.03.2006, passed in W.P.(S) No. 6314 of 2005, whereby the writ petition of the appellant, for quashing the letter dated 18/23 -07 -2005, issued by the respondents intimating him that he would be superannuating from service w.e.f. 31.12.2005, was dismissed.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case is that the appellant was appointed in Bharat Cocking Coal Limited (in short B.C.C.L.) in the year 1970 as an underground labourer and he became permanent employee of the management in the year 1980 and he was posted as surface employee in the same year; that vide letter dated 3/04 -02 -1986 (Annexure -1) the appellant was regularized as dresser in Technical Grade "H". It is stated that at the time of appointment the appellant had mentioned his date of birth as 04 -02 -1952 on the basis of the matriculation certificate granted to the appellant in the year 1966 by the Bihar School Examination Board (Annexure -2); that he was matriculate at the time of appointment and he was not questioned by the appellant regarding the entry made with respect to the date of birth; that he was issued service excerpts in the year 1987, wherein his date of birth was recorded as 04 -02 -1952 (Annexure -3); that initially the date of birth of the appellant was recorded as 1943 in the service excerpts (Annexure -3), which was brought to the notice of the respondents corrected as 04 -02 -1952 and the appellant was under the belief that necessary corrections have been carried out in accordance with the standing orders, with respect, to the appointees who have passed matriculation or equivalent examination; that the appellant -petitioner was surprised to receive a letter from the management bearing No. BCCL/858 dated 18/23 -07 -2005 (Annexure -4), whereby, he was intimated that he would be attaining the age of 60 years and would be retiring w.e.f. 31 -12 -2005; that in Annexure -4 showing the superannuation in December, 2005, the date of birth has not been mentioned and in the said Annexure -4, the date of birth of the appellant has been recorded as 1945; that the appellant filed a representation with respondent No. 6 i.e. the Manager, Industry, Kusunda Area on 05.08.2005 intimating him about the incorrect entry of the date of birth requesting them to make necessary correction, but the same was not looked into, whereupon the appellant filed a writ application being W.P.(S) No. 6314 of 2005 for quashing the letter dated 18/23 -07 -2005, but the said writ was dismissed by the impugned order.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that the date of birth of the appellant recorded in matriculation certificate simply demonstrates that his date of superannuation should not have been in the year 2005 and in support of his contention, he has also relied in the decision reported in : 2007(3) JCR 681 (Jhr) (FB) in the case of Kamta Pandey Vs. M/s. B.C.C.L. through Chairman -cum -Managing Director, Dhanbad & Ors., wherein it has been held that the date of birth mentioned in the matriculation certificate has binding effect and he has also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Eastern Coalfields Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Bajrangi Rabidas reported in : 2013(4) JLJR SC 467 and submitted that the ratio in the aforesaid decision explicitly states in paras 14 to 16 that the date of birth as recorded in the matriculation certificate should be accorded priority.