Kala Nayak, son of late Puran Nayak v. Central Coalfields Limited
2018-11-13
ANIRUDDHA BOSE, SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
body2018
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : I.A. No.4775 of 2017 1. I.A. No.4775 of 2017 is an application for condonation of delay of 321 days in filing the application. 2. Mr. Das, the learned counsel is appearing for the Central Coalfields Limited. 3. Having considered the materials disclosed, we condone the delay. 4. I.A. No.4775 of 2017 is allowed in the above terms. Civil Review No. 44 of 2017 5. The review petition relates to correction of date of birth of the petitioner who was appointed as Shovel Operator with Central Coalfields Limited. 6. According to the employer’s record, as on 17.01.1984 he was 27 years of age. The petitioner, however, contended that his date of birth was 28.08.1958 and not 27.01.1957. The request for correction of date of birth was made in the year 2015, just two years before his attaining the age of superannuation. 7. When the authorities rejected such plea, the review applicant had approached the learned First Court. His writ petition, however, was dismissed on the ground that it was raised at the fag end of his service career. Certain other materials including the Service Register were also referred to in the judgment of the learned First Court. The appellate court sustained the judgement of the learned First Court, relying on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Secretary & Commissioner, Home Department & Ors. vs. R. Kirubakaran”, reported in (1994) (Supp.) 1 SCC 155. The appeal was also dismissed. The review applicant now wants us to consider his date of birth recorded in his School Leaving Certificate and Matriculation Certificate. Both were cited and considered by the learned First Court. The Matriculation Certificate was issued after the petitioner entered into service and in his service records his date of birth was recorded as 27.01.1957. 8. We do not find any of the grounds specified in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC present in this case on the basis of which the review application can be entertained. 9. The review application is, accordingly, dismissed.