SARGUN RAM Vs. B.C.C.L.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the petitioner and the respondent -BCCL. Petitioner has been superannuated on 1.7.2012 by notice dated 12.1.2012 issued by the Project Officer, Nichitpur Colliery, M/s. BCCL. Dhanbad, respondent No. 3. Petitioner's case is that he was appointed on 11.8.1986 as Miner Loader under the respondent - BCCL. He has submitted that during medical examination on 27.6.1986 he mentioned his age as 28 years which was accordingly recorded and thereafter after obtaining his thumb impression in the medical examination report, other reports were filled up by the official of the management. At no point the petitioner was informed that as per the Medical Examination his age has been assessed as 34 years. Petitioner, thereafter was transferred to Loyabad Coke Plant on 12.4.1998 and thereafter transferred to Nichitpur Colliery on 22.8.2008. Petitioner has stated that he came to know that in the service excerpts his date of birth has been wrongly recorded 27.6.1952 in place of 5.5.1958. He made representation for necessary correction. However, he has been surprised to receive the superannuation notice.

(2.) PETITIONER has annexed Annexure -4, Matriculation tabulation register of Bihar School Examination Board of Secondary Annual Examination in 1975 in respect of BGS High School, Loyabad where against the petitioner's name the date of birth is recorded as 5.5.1958, though he had not passed Matriculation Examination. He has also enclosed Annexure 4/1, transfer certificate issued by the said Rajkiyakrit Basudeo Gandhi Smriti High School as per which his date of birth is shown as 5.5.1958 and it has also been recorded that petitioner had participated in the Secondary Examination. It is submitted that in such circumstances when he had already represented before the respondent - authorities his case ought to have been referred before the Apex Medical Board for determination of his age. Representation dated 26.3.2012(Annexure -3) and dated 18.8.2012 (Annexure -5) have been enclosed in support of his aforesaid contention.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent - BCCL submitted that as per Medical Examination report which is at Annexure -1 and said to have been prepared in 1986 itself the thump impression of the candidate borne on both left hand column shows that the petitioner was conscious of his age determination i.e. 34 years at the time it was made. It is further submitted that the petitioner has produced the transfer certificate (Annexure -4/1) which has been issued on 30.4.2008 from the school in question showing dearly again that at no point of time earlier the petitioner had staked claim for correction of his date of birth. Annexure -4, the tabulation register has also been obtained on 11.5.2010 certified by the Principal of the said school. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the claim of the petitioner for correction of his date of birth at the fag end of his service should not be allowed in view of the law settled on this point.