ORDER : The petitioner is praying for regularization of his services in Grade-IV i.e. the post of Driver, as he has worked regularly, on the said post in the office of Primary Health Centre, Bagodar. 2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on 16.7.1990 as Daily Wages Employee on the recommendation of the then Health Minister. As per Annexure-1 to the writ petition, is the appointment letter. The petitioner was working in the office of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Giridih. Counsel for the petitioner, further submits, that prior to 1990, the petitioner was working in the Bihar Relief Committee from December, 1973 and to substantiate his submission, the counsel for the petitioner relies upon Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner worked regularly till filing of this writ petition i.e. till the year 2004 and, thereafter, no work was taken from him. Counsel for the petitioner lastly submits that he should be regularized and the department should treat him as a permanent employee. 3. Counsel for the State, opposes the prayer, relying upon the several paragraphs of the counter affidavit. He submits that the petitioner's claim as driver cannot be accepted. Counsel for the State further submits that the Driving Licence of the petitioner is forged and cannot be relied upon. The Licence was granted to him in August 1973 when the petitioner was merely nine years old. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the claim of the petitioner, that he was working since December 1973 in the Bihar Relief Committee, also cannot be accepted, because as per the School Leaving Certificate of the petitioner, his date of birth is 4.1.1964. This means at the relevant time, his age was only nine years. Counsel for the petitioner lastly submits that all the documents, annexed to this petition, have been manufactured only for the purpose of making out a case, but the petitioner has miserable failed to do so. 4. From the rival submissions made by the parties, I find from the documents of the petitioner, filed along with the present writ petition, that the date of birth of the petitioner, as per School Leaving Certificate, is 4.1.1964. 4. From the rival submissions made by the parties, I find from the documents of the petitioner, filed along with the present writ petition, that the date of birth of the petitioner, as per School Leaving Certificate, is 4.1.1964. That being the case, the Driving Licence, which was issued on 03.08.1973, cannot be said to be a proper and genuine document, because as per Section 4 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 a person of nine years cannot be allowed to drive motor vehicle so no driving licence could have been issued to him. Thus, the Driving Licence of the petitioner is a doubtful document, which is not accepted by this Court. Further, it is stated that the petitioner was working since 1973. This submission also, cannot be accepted on the same ground, because at that time, the age of the petitioner was only nine years. It is admitted by the petitioner that he is not working since 2004 i.e. more than 12 years and a person who is out of work for more than 12 years, cannot be regularized. 5. In that view of the findings arrived at, this writ petition stands dismissed.