ORDER By the Court 1. The petitioner, a representative Union of the employees of Bihar State Electricity Board (the Board) has challenged the direction issued by respondent No. 4 the Deputy Director, (Personnel). Patratu Thermal Power Station (shortly PTPS) calling upon 126 employees of the Board to undergo medical examination for verification of their respective ages and in order to ascertain the correct date of birth. Copies of such direction issued to the employees of the petitioner- union, have been annexed as Annexure 1 series to the writ application. 2. Petitioners case is that those 126 employees who have been short listed and directed to undergo such medical examination have been working for the last 20-35 years and only It is at the verge of retirement, they have been directed to undergo medical examination although the date of birth of these employees have been duly recorded in the service records at the time of employment. 3. The stand of the respondents, in the counter affidavit, is that on receipt of information from rellable sources that the date of birth appearing in the service books of the workmen have been tempered and over-written and even the original service books have been removed, the respondent-Board constituted a Committee to examine the discrepancies in the date of birth of the workmen. The Committee visited PTPS and examined the service books of the workmen and submitted a report to the effect that there is large number of cases where rnanipula-tion/over-writing has been made in the dates of birth in the service records. On the basis of the said report the members of the petitioner- Union, have been t:alled upon to undergo medical examination. 4. I have heard Mr. A.K. Sinha, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Indrani sen Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-Board. 5. Mr. Sinha. learned counsel, referring to para 7 of the writ petition, submitted that the Board has to follow the provisions contained in Clause 4(c) of the Standing Order in the matter of determination of age if there is any dispute with regard to actual date of birth of the employees. The respondents- Board, in the counter affidavit, however, stated that Clause 4(c) of the Standing Order is not applicable, rather. Clause 4(d) of the Standing Order will apply in the cases of the petitioners employees. The respondents- Board, in the counter affidavit, however, stated that Clause 4(c) of the Standing Order is not applicable, rather. Clause 4(d) of the Standing Order will apply in the cases of the petitioners employees. Neither Clause 4(d) has been quoted in the counter affidavit nor a copy of the certified Standing Order has been produced by the respondent. In the rejoinder to the counter affidavit the petitioner has stated that Clause 4(c), after amendment/modification of the Standing Order, has been renumbered as 4(d). Clause 4(d) has been quoted in the rejoinder which is as under :-- "The age of every workman other than casual, shall be recorded at the time of the employment. The Matriculation or School Leaving Certificate or Horoscope shall be deemed to be the satisfactory proof of the age of the workman. A workman who is unable to produce documentary evidence of his age or the same having oeen produced is not admitted by the appointing authority for valid reasons, he shall state his age and make a written declaration that the age as stated by him is correct. Such statement shall always be supported by an affidavit. Such workman may be sent by the appointing authority to the Govt. Medical Officer for examination and his opinion as to the workmans age shall be binding on the workman. In case of dispute in the matter of age and date of birth as recorded in service book at the time of appointment, during the period of service due to overwriting, cutting on it without sufficient supporting document as mentioned - in clause (c) above of standing order which should have been in the file, the matter will be referred to Medical Board by the appointing authoiity on the request of the workman for determination of age and the decision of the Medical Board would be final and binding on the Management as well as workman. This will be applicable only for those employees who do not possess educational qualification i.e., Matric and above." 6. It is, therefore, clear that in case of dispute during service period in the matter of actual date of birth of the employees due to over-writing in the service books or records, the matter will be referred to the Medical Board by the appointing authority at the request of the workman for determination of his age. It is, therefore, clear that in case of dispute during service period in the matter of actual date of birth of the employees due to over-writing in the service books or records, the matter will be referred to the Medical Board by the appointing authority at the request of the workman for determination of his age. It is also clear that if the employee possesses certificate of educational qualification then the appointing authority, if not satisfied with the documentary evidence regarding the date of birth, can refer the matter to the Medical Board for determination of age. 7. In the instant case, as noticed above. the respondents without assigning any reason, without calling upon the employees of the petitioner to submit their documents in support of their age and without recording the reasons for their dissatisfaction with regard to the documentary evidence, directly issued the impugned notices calling upon them to undergo medical examination. In my opinion, the respondent-Board before asking the employees to undergo medical examination, ought to have called upon them to produce the supporting authentic documentary evidence including matriculation certificate In support of their date of birth and it was only after recording the reasons of dissatisfaction, should have called upon the employees of the petitioner to under ;o medical examination. This application is, therefore, disposed of with the following directions :-- (i) The employees of the petitioner-Union against whom the notices (Annexure 1 series) have been issued, shall submit their, respective documentary evidences in support of their age to respondent No, 4 within two weeks from today. (ii) On receipt of papers respondent No, 4 or other appropriate authority shall examine all the documents that may be furnished by the employees in support of their age and the authority, thereafter shall take a decision in accordance with law. (iii) If the authority will not be satisfied with the documents furnished by the employees, then the authority may ask such employees to undergo medical examination. After medical examination the authority shall take final decision with regard to the age of the concerned employees and communicate such decision within a week. (iv) If the employees or any of them is/ are not satisfied with the decision that may be taken by the respondent- authority with regard to his/their age. he/they shall be at liberty to move the civil Court for determination of age. (iv) If the employees or any of them is/ are not satisfied with the decision that may be taken by the respondent- authority with regard to his/their age. he/they shall be at liberty to move the civil Court for determination of age. (v) Till final decision with regard to age of the employees is taken by the respondent-authority in the manner aforesaid, the operation of Annexure 1 series shall remain stayed. 8. Petition disposed of with certain directions.