Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 208 (PAT)

Baidya Nath Singh v. B. C. C. L, Dhanbad

2000-02-04

M.Y.EQBAL

body2000
Judgment M.Y.Eqbal, J. 1. In this writ application, petitioner has prayed for quashing the order passed by the concerned respondent as contained in Annexure-7 to the writ application whereby petitioner has been superannuated with effect from 1.7.97 taking the date of birth of the petitioner as 35 years on 13.1.1972. 2. Petitioner was appointed as shoot fire Mazdoor in B.C.C.L. in the year 1972. Petitioners case is that his date of birth recorded in the service book is 3.1.1946 on the basis of School Leaving Certificate. Petitioner was also issued Identity Card by the respondents in which date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 3.1.1946. Photo copy of the School Leaving Certificate and the Identity Card have been annexed as Annexure-1 and 2 respectively to the writ application. Petitioners further case is that respondent sent the petitioner for training to Mining Sardar under Mines Act, 1952 and under the Coal Mines Regulation, 1957. Petitioner got training of Mining Sardar and he passed successfully and was issued certificate of Mining Sardar in which also date of birth of the petitioner was shown as 7.1.1946, copy of the certificate has been annexed as Annexure-6 to the writ application. It is contended that in 1993 also new Identity Card was issued to the petitioner by the respondents in which date of birth was mentioned as 7.1.1946. However, date of birth of the petitioner was illegally cut down in the Identity Card for which petitioner raised objection and he represented for correction of his age in the Identity Card but no action was taken by the respondents. All of a sudden respondent issued notice on 29.1.97 stating that the petitioner is going to be superannuated on 1.7.1997 as he completed 60 years of age on 1.7.97. Petitioner immediately challenged the aforesaid order by filing CWJC No. 769/97R. The said writ application was dismissed on the ground that petitioner approached this court at the fag end of the retirement. Aggrieved by the said order passed by this court petitioner preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court being S.L.P. (C) No. 18934/97 which was allowed by the Hon ble Supreme Court on 27.2.98 and the order of this court was set aside. The Supreme Court directed this court to dispose of the writ application on merit. Aggrieved by the said order passed by this court petitioner preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court being S.L.P. (C) No. 18934/97 which was allowed by the Hon ble Supreme Court on 27.2.98 and the order of this court was set aside. The Supreme Court directed this court to dispose of the writ application on merit. It appears that after remand of the matter from the Supreme Court the aforementioned CWJC No. 769/97R was heard by a bench of this court. The writ application was disposed on 29.7.98 directing the petitioner to file a representation before the respondent-authorities who shall dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In pursuance of the said order petitioner filed representation before the authority concerned on 17.8.98. which was rejected on 5.10.98 by the respondent/authority. A copy of the said order of rejection dated 5.10.98 has been annexed as Annexure-13 to the writ application. 3. I have heard Mr. Jawahar Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta learned counsel for the respondents. 4. As stated above the respondent-authority disposed of the representation by passing a reasoned order which is impugned in this writ application. From perusal of the said order it appears that respondents have refused to accept the age of the petitioner on the basis of School Leaving Certificate as according to the respondent School Leaving Certificate is not authentic and genuine document. Respondent also disbelieved the Mining Sardar Certificate. The representation of the petitioner was rejected on the same ground that the petitioner raised objection at the fag end of his retirement. 5. This matter was heard by me on 10.11.99 and having not satisfied with the impugned order respondents were directed to produce the original service-book. pursuant to that order respondent produced the original service book and also the Form-B register, said to have been maintained by erstwhile Colliery owner. From perusal of Form-B register it appears that against the name of the petitioner the age has been recorded 35 years as on 13.1.1972 i.e. date of commencement of employment. Exact date of birth was not recorded in the said register nor there was any basis of recording age of the petitioner as 35 years. However, in the service-book the date of birth of the petitioner was originally recorded as 3.1.1946. Exact date of birth was not recorded in the said register nor there was any basis of recording age of the petitioner as 35 years. However, in the service-book the date of birth of the petitioner was originally recorded as 3.1.1946. Subsequently the said date of birth was struck off and in that place 35 years as on 13.1.1972 was entered. There is much interpolation and changes made at the instance of the respondents in the column of date of birth of the petitioner recorded in the service-book. No explanation has been given in the counter-affidavit as to how and under what circumstances the original date of birth of the petitioner recorded as 3.1.1946 was struck off and in place of that 35 years as on 13.1.1972 was recorded. Admittedly this alteration and interpolation in the service-book was made at the instance of the respondent behind the back of the petitioner. 6. Recently, I have come across another case being CWJC No. 1150/98R against one of the subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. namely Central Coalfields Ltd. who was the respondent. That case was quite similar to the present case inasmuch as in that case also date of birth of the petitioner recorded in the service-book was changed at the instance of respon-dent/C.C.L. behind the back of the petitioner of that case. In that case although the writ application was dismissed but in L.P.A. No. 417/97R filed by the petitioner of that case the Division Bench called for original service book and found that there was interpolation and change made in the column of date of birth by the respondent behind the back of the petitioner. 7. In the instant case also as noticed above the date of birth of the petitioner recorded in the service-book was altered and changed by interpolation made by the respondent behind the back of the petitioner. This Court takes serious exception to conduct of the respondent in changing the date of birth in the service book without giving notice and behind the back of the petitioner. Curiously enough the representation of the petitioner was disposed of on the ground that the objection with regard to date of birth was raised by the petitioner at the fag end of service. Curiously enough the representation of the petitioner was disposed of on the ground that the objection with regard to date of birth was raised by the petitioner at the fag end of service. In fact respondentauthority reiterated the same thing which was held by this court in the order dated 25.6.97, which was ultimately set aside by the Supreme Court. It is further surprising to note that after the appointment of the petitioner, respondents issued Identity Card and the Mining Sardar Certificate in which date of birth of the petitioner was shown as 1946. But for the first time without any basis and ignoring their own document and also School Leaving Certificate the date of birth of the petitioner was altered behind his back and without notice to him. In that view of the matter, I am of the definite opinion that the impugned order passed by the respondent/authority superannuating the petitioner with effect from 1.7.1997 is palpably illegal, malafide and without any basis. 8. This writ application is therefore allowed and the impugned order as contained in Annexure-7 to the writ application and the subsequent decision of the respondents are hereby quashed. It is declared that petitioner shall superannuate in January, 2006 after attaining the age of superannuation, which shall be counted from 03.1.1946.