ORDER Permod Kohli, J. 1. Petitioner was serving with respondent No. 1- Company and she has been stopped from attending the duty with effect from 4th February, 2002 on the ground that she has attained the age of superannuation on 11th February, 2001. According to respondents, the date of birth of the petitioner is 11th February, 1941, which fact is also disputed by her. Petitioner has placed reliance upon Form-B. wherein aeainst Column 10 i.e. the date of termination/leaving of employment is mentioned as 19th July, 2009. She has further referred to Annexure-2, which is the report of the Apex Medical Board wherein age of the petitioner was determined as 37 years, as on 19th July, 1988. Even reference is made to another document i.e., service excerpts, which also indicates the date of birth of the petitioner as 19th July, 1940, as per Medical Board. Even there is communication dated 27th December, 2000 on record, whereby the Personnel Manager, Jeenagora Colliery, has informed the Company for correction of date of birth in respect to the petitioner. 2. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated that the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 11th February, 1941, as per the identity card issued by the Colliery wherefrom the petitioner was earlier transferred. They have also placed on record copy of identity card, as Annexure-A, wherein date of birth of the petitioner is shown to be 11th February, 1941 along with-photograph. Respondents have taken stand that medical report relied upon by the petitioner is in respect to one Kaushalya Devi, wife of Debu Bhuiya, who was medically examined. Incidentally, the names of both the ladies, who are employees of respondent No. 1 are the same, though the names of their respective husbands vary. 3. The dispute of date of birth cannot be decided by the Court. It is the prerogative of the employer to determine the dispute regarding date of birth and with a view to determine the actual date of birth/age in case of a dispute/doubt the employer is entitled to hold an enquiry. 4. From the facts placed on record by both sides, it appears that there is some doubt regarding actual date of birth of the petitioner. 4. From the facts placed on record by both sides, it appears that there is some doubt regarding actual date of birth of the petitioner. However, the employer has not conducted any enquiry to determine the exact/approximate date of birth, nor providing any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and stopped her from performing duties on the assumed date of retirement. Petitioner is already out of job though she claims, she has right to continue in service till 2009. 5. In view of the above circumstances and legal position, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-employer to hold enquiry in respect to the date of birth of the petitioner. Petitioner shall be associated with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent-employer. Respondents are also at liberty to subject the petitioner to fresh medical examination by a duly constituted Board of Doctors. They will communicate the date for such medical examination to the petitioner, who will make herself available for such medical examination without fail. Petitioner is at liberty to produce any evidence/material before the enquiry authority constituted by the respondents for the purpose. 6. Let enquiry before completed within a period of four months. If the petitioner failed to appear before the Board of Doctors, respondents are at liberty to take appropriate decision. However, petitioner will be informed of the date for appearance before the Medical Board and Enquiry Committee respectively.