ORDER The respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) was an employee in the establishment of the appellant. He became its employee on its being taken over on June 23, 1981. The appellant notified to its employees who had become its employees, on the erstwhile company being taken over, to produce proof of their age in two notices issued on December 5, 1981 and February 11, 1982. However, the appellant did not make any claim as to what is his correct date of birth and which is in the record of the appellant is July 1, 1932 and therefore he was retired from service on June 30, 1990 on attaining the age of 50 years. The respondent thereafter raised an industrial dispute two years later before the Labour Court and he placed proof before the Labour Court to show that his date of birth is February 2, 1936 and therefore he should have been retired only on February 1, 1994. The Labour Court recorded a finding that the date of birth of the respondent is February 2, 1936. This finding of fact has been affirmed by the learned single Judge and by the Division Bench of the High Court as well. It is against this order that this appeal has been filed by special leave. 2. The fact that the date of birth of the respondent is February 2, 1936 cannot be seriously disputed in view of the certificate issued by the Registrar of births and deaths. Therefore this finding of fact recorded by the Labour Court and affirmed by the High Court cannot be assailed. However, in this regard respondent had made a claim before the Labour Court two years after his retirement and it is not proper for the Labour Court to have granted the back wages for the period between June 30, 1990 and February 1, 1994 and that it could have only granted the back wages from the date of filing of the petition before the Labour Court. The Labour Court ought not to have granted interest either, particularly, when the respondent had not worked for that period and was making a belated claim. In the circumstances grant of interest also is not appropriate. The respondent would be entitled only to back wages for a period of two years from February 1, 1992 till January 30, 1994. The Labour Court ought not to have granted interest either, particularly, when the respondent had not worked for that period and was making a belated claim. In the circumstances grant of interest also is not appropriate. The respondent would be entitled only to back wages for a period of two years from February 1, 1992 till January 30, 1994. He will not be entitled to any interest. The amount due to him shall be paid by the appellant within three months from today. If such a payment is not made he will be entitled to interest @ 18% per annum. The appeal is partly allowed as stated above. Appeal allowed partly. **************** Parallel Citations of other Journals : Cement Corporation of India Ltd. v. Raghbir Singh, 2001(8) Supreme 544 : 2001 (3) LLN 853 : 2001 (2) LLJ 414 00017