Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 334 (JHR)

Ramjanam Ram v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. , Dhanbad

2002-03-12

M.Y.EQBAL

body2002
ORDER M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner in the instant writ application has prayed for quashing the letter as contained in Reference No. BAR/2259/2000 dated 12,10.2000 by which respondents have illegally rejected the claim of the petitioner for considering his date of birth on the basis of matriculation certificate for the purpose of his retirement. 3. I have perused the affidavits filed by the parties. It appears that the petitioner and one B.N. Mishra were appointed as Clerk/ Registered Clerk in Barari Colliery. Both the petitioners and B.N. Mishra were appointed in the year 1975-76 respectively. They passed their matriculation examination before appointment. 4. However in Form-B register the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as 1.7.1992, The date of birth of aforesaid B.N. Mishra was recorded as 1.7.1940. Both of them applied before the competent authority for correction of date of birth as per the matriculation certificate. In matriculation certificate the date of birth of the petitioner has been recorded as 5.7.1949 while the date of birth of Mr. B.N. Mishra was recorded as 1.7.1945. In other words, at the time of appointment petitioner was 15 years 10 months, while B.N. Mishra was 16 years 3 months. The application of both the abovenamed persons was processed by the Dy. Personnel Manager and the same was sent to the higher authority with a request that after proper inquiry by the Vigilance Department the date of birth shown in the records have been found correct and, therefore, the claim of both the petitioner and B.N. Mishra are genuine and the same deserves consideration. Curiously enough the concerned respondent issued order dated 29.6.2000 rejecting the application of the petitioner for correction of the date of birth while the application of B.N. Mishra was allowed. The order dated 29.6.2000 observed as follows: "As per letter No. BCCL/Per/IP Age/B.N. Mishra/2K/4226.26 dt. 20/21.6.2000 issued from G.MI/C P & IR), BCCL, Koyla Bhawan and subsequent Memo No. BCCL/GM/Li/Per/F-2/2K/1590 dated 26/27.6.2000 issued from Dy. C.P.M.. Lodna Area, the date of birth of Sri B.N. Mishra. P.O.s Clerk, Personnel No. 00893933 has been changed as 1.07.1945 as per matriculation certificate instead of 01.07.40 as recorded in Form B register, Hence the retirement letter No. BAR/2000/1309 dt. 16.6.2000 is hereby cancelled." 5. C.P.M.. Lodna Area, the date of birth of Sri B.N. Mishra. P.O.s Clerk, Personnel No. 00893933 has been changed as 1.07.1945 as per matriculation certificate instead of 01.07.40 as recorded in Form B register, Hence the retirement letter No. BAR/2000/1309 dt. 16.6.2000 is hereby cancelled." 5. No reason has been assigned in the said order as to why the application of B.N. Mishra was allowed and his date of birth in the service record was corrected as per the matriculation certificate. The petitioner and Mr. B.N. Mishra were below 18 years of age. On being questioned. Mr. A.K. Mehta learned counsel appearing for the petitioner expressed his inability to satisfy this Court about the reasons why respondents have allowed the application of B.N. Mishra and rejected the case of the petitioner. 6. In my opinion, when the application of B.N. Mishra was allowed by the respondent, the rejection of the application of the petitioner was wholly illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory. The impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner or correction of date of birth as per the matriculation certificate cannot be sustained in law. This writ application is, therefore, allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the respondents are directed to correct the date of birth of the petitioner in the register as per the matriculation certificate.