ORDER By the Court.-Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14th December, 2011 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.2, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 30/2002, whereby reference dated 10th April, 2002 made by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour under Section 10 (1)(D) of the I.D. Act 1947 which is quoted hereunder, has been answered against the workman in question. “Kya Kol Mines Engineering Association ki B.C.C.L. Kustore Chetra ka Prabandhtantrase mang ki Sri Prasadi Bhuiya, Tyndal Zamadar. Burragarh Colliery ki janam tarik baras 1947 manteha hue usi ka anusar unki sevaneverthi ki tarik barsa 2007 may nirdharit ki jai uchil awang nanya sangalh hai, yadi hayi. to karmkar kis rehal ka patra hay”. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on receipt of the superannuation notice, he raised an industrial dispute wherein he was asked to superannuate with effect from 30th June, 2001. According to him, his date of retirement should be 2007 reckoned from his year of birth i.e. 1947 which is also reflected in the Family Card issued by the respondent Employer and the Voter Identity Card issued by the Election Commission (Ext. W1 & W2). However, in spite of the fact that the Management witness being M.W. 2 had deposed that the date of the petitioner's retirement is 1st July, 2007, the same has been disbelieved by the learned Labour Court in holding otherwise against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has referred to the findings of the learned Labour Court wherein it has been specifically recorded that in the service excerpts which has been admitted by the workman in his cross-examination which is marked as Ext. M- 1, his date of appointment is reflected as 17th October, 1971 and his year of birth is 1941. It is submitted that his year of birth, as recorded in the Form-B Register (M. W. - 3) which is a statutory register of the Management, cannot be refuted by relying upon the Family Card/Identity Card. He further submits that no other evidence apart from the identity card bears such date of birth. It is submitted that his year of birth, as recorded in the Form-B Register (M. W. - 3) which is a statutory register of the Management, cannot be refuted by relying upon the Family Card/Identity Card. He further submits that no other evidence apart from the identity card bears such date of birth. Accordingly, the learned Labour Court having found that the year of birth of the workman has been entered as 1941 in the Form-B Register and the I.D. Register as well as in the service excerpts, he has been retired rightly at the age of 60 years with effect from 30th June, 2001. The demand raised by the workman is not justified as per the statutory record. 5. I laving heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned Award as also other materials on record, it is clear that the year of birth on the basis of which the petitioner has been retired is 1941 as has been recorded in the Form-B Register which has been admitted by the workman. The I.D. Register also docs not support the same or the identity Card (W-1) upon which the petitioner is relying showing his year of birth as 1947. The petitioner after having accepted the entry made in the Form-B Register and remained silent all along has raised the dispute after issuance of the superannuation notice. In such circumstances, I do not find any infirmity or perversity in the impugned Award and therefore no grounds for interference in the writ application arc made out. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.