Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 633 (JHR)

Barti Kamin v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.

2009-04-28

AJIT KUMAR SINHA

body2009
Order The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief:- (i) For issuance of writ of mandamus or in nature th€'1eof commanding/directing the respondents to accept the voluntary retirement of the petitioner under specials voluntary retirement scheme for which she had applied in the year 2000 itself, (ii) For a further direction to Respondents to make the appointment of the son of the petitioner namely Jogeshwar Nonia under the aforesaid scheme. 2. In the instant case the petitioner had earlier moved in W.P.(S) No. 3571 of 2001 whereby the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 8.8.2001, disposed of the same with direction and observation to consider representation. Again the petitioner moved this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(S) No. 303 of 2002 and the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 11.1.2002 dismissed the same accepting to Respondent's stand. Thereafter the petitioner moved this Hon'ble Court in L.P.A. No. 146 of 2002 challenging the order dated 11.1.2002 which was also dismissed by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 15.8.2002. However, the instant writ application IS being filed in view of the fact that earlier stand of Respondents was falsified .as per fresh development according to which the age of petitioner on the date .of her application for V.R.S. was less than 55 years (D.O.B. 12.7.1948 admitted by Respondents) and her son was entitled to be employed being 18 years of age as required under the scheme. 3. In Annexure-11, annexed to the writ petition, which is at page-41 of the paper book the Personnel Manager, Jamunia OCP vide its letter dated 28.4.2002 has specifically stated that the General Manager (P&IR) had mentioned the date of birth of Barati Kamin as 17.10.1945 due to which her V.R.S.(F) resignation application was rejected. Whereas her D.O.B. in all the records of Jamunia OCP in respect of Smt. Barati Kamin is 12.7.1948. 4. It will be evident on reading the aforesaid facts that an incorrect and misleading statement was made on affidavit which led to the dismissal of the earlier writ petition as well as the L.P.A. and the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that any order obtained on fraud, deceit or misrepresentation is a nullity right at the inception and the respondent-Management are guilty of contempt and perjury for filing false affidavit. 5. Shri Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent fairly admits that the mistake did occur on the part of the respondent. 5. Shri Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent fairly admits that the mistake did occur on the part of the respondent. The Officer of the respondent-Company Mr. R.H. Toppo, was directed to appear, is present in the Court. 6. In view of the admission and also in view of the affidavit and the records now filed by the respondents admitting the fact that the service record showed the date of birth of the petitioner as 12.7.1948, the respondent authorities are prima facie guilty of contempt and perjury. 7. The learned counsel for the respondents prays to take a lenient view and also submits that the petitioner has superannuated after attaining the age of 60 years and has also collected the retiral dues. He also submits that the mistake committed was bona fide and not deliberate. 8. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the fact that the petitioner has attained superannuation after completing 60 years of service and has collected retiral dues there is no point to initiate contempt proceedings and or perjury proceeding under Section 340 Cr.P.C. at this stage. However, it will be in the interest of justice to direct the respondent-Management to pay a cost of Rs. 20,000/- to the petitioner since he suffered at the hands of the respondents authority for making false statement on oath. It is also directed that if the retiral dues has not been released the same should be released within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 9. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction.