PARSHHURAM SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed in the year 1968 on the post of Electrician Assistant at Koshi Project, Birpur. Subsequently, in the year 1994, he was posted at Dumri in the Irrigation Department where he was working as Electrician and as per the entry made in the service record, petitioner is supposed to retire on superannuation on 31.3.2009 but he was made to retire on 31.3.2007 on the pretext that some manipulation has been done in the record relating to date of birth and on that plea, date of birth of the petitioner was taken to be 25.3.1939 instead of 25.3.1941. In order to settle the dispute, respondent no.4, Executive Engineer, Konar Canal Division, Dumri, Giridih asked the petitioner to get himself examined by the Civil Surgeon, Giridih for assessment of the age. Pursuant to that direction, petitioner got himself examined by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Giridih on 4.1.2007, who assessed the age of the petitioner as 58 years. Accordingly, report was submitted but that was not accepted by the Department on the plea that age has not been assessed scientifically. However, the petitioner was allowed to discharge his duties but payment was stopped and, therefore, the petitioner filed a writ application before this Court, bearing no. W.P.(S) No.1780 of 2007 which was disposed of on 4.9.2007 directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Respondent no.2, Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Ranchi with respect to payment of the arrears of salary and the respondent no.2 was directed to pass order in accordance with law by assigning reason.

(3.) On receiving the report, respondent no.2, Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Ranchi thought it proper to get the petitioner examined by the Medical Board to be constituted by RIMS. Accordingly, as per the instruction of the respondent no.2, Medical Board was constituted. On examining the petitioner on 23.11.2007 the Board did find the petitioner aged about 59 years plus minus 2 years. In spite of receiving the report, when no order was passed by the respondent, petitioner has filed this writ application for directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to do his duties and to pay arrears of salary accrued from 1.5.2007. The writ application was heard on 26.8.2008 and on that day an order was passed whereby respondent no.2, Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Ranchi was asked to decide the matter relating to the age of the petitioner and also with respect to payment of back wages within three weeks.