VIJAY KUMAR Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment has been regretted on the ground that on the date of submission of application, he had crossed the age of 35 years which is the maximum age provided for employment under the respondent M/s Central Coalfields Limited. In the present proceeding, the petitioner has challenged communication dated 14.09.2015 and the consequential order dated 08.12.2016 declining compassionate appointment to him.

(2.) The issue involved in this writ petition is, whether date of birth recorded in the Matriculation or other equivalent examinations would take precedence over the age of a claimant recorded in the service excerpt and/or age determination by the Medical Board?

(3.) Petitioner's father, who was a Wagon Loader at Barka Sayal Area, died on 18.06.2014. Petitioner's mother submitted an application on 007.2014 for compassionate appointment to the petitioner. The petitioner claims that he has also submitted another application on 009.2015. He was medically examined for age assessment and he was found aged about 3540. His age was assessed by the Medical Board on 15.09.2016. The respondents have pleaded that age of the petitioner recorded in the service excerpts of his father indicates that as on 01.04.1987, he was 8 years old and accordingly, on 007.2014 when his mother submitted application for his compassionate appointment he had already attained age of 35 years 3 months and 2 days. In the company's records age of the petitioner recorded in LLTC Option Form is 35 years 2 months 21 days, in LTC Form A 35 years and 29 days and in P.S.3 Form 36 years 1 month and 5 days, as on 007.2014. Accordingly, he has been found ineligible for appointment under M/s Central Coalfields Limited as he had already crossed the maximum age for employment under the company.