Paseddi Narayana Ec No.1126647, vs The Singareni Collieries Company ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2505 Tel

    THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

                     W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

ORDER:

In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of

mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in retiring

the petitioner from service w.e.f. 28.02.2023, as illegal, arbitrary

and to set aside the same and consequently to direct the

respondents to continue the petitioner in service upto

28.02.2026 with all consequential and attendant benefits and to

pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ

petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed in the

respondent company as Badli Filler on 19.02.1987 and

subsequently, he was promoted as General Mazdoor (HEMM). It

is submitted that at the time of his initial appointment, the

medical officer had assessed his age as 22 years as on

19.02.1987 and the same was recorded in his service records,

such as CMPF Records, Form-PS3 & Form-PS4, etc., and

therefore, according to the petitioner, he is entitled to continue

in service upto 28.02.2026. It is submitted that the respondent

No.4 issued a proceedings dated 05.08.2022 referring the

PMD,J W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

petitioner to the respondent No.5 for assessment of his age and

accordingly, the petitioner was directed to appear before the

Apex Medical Board on 06.08.2022. It is submitted that Medical

Board has assessed the age of the petitioner as 60 years as on

06.08.2022 and even as per the said report, the petitioner is

entitled to continue upto 31.08.2023. However, the respondent

No.4 has issued an office order dated 07.02.2023 stating that

the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 28.02.2023

and that his name will be removed from the company rolls w.e.f.

01.03.2023. It is submitted that the age of superannuation of

the employees working in the respondent No.1 Company was 61

years as per the Circular dated 12.08.2021 and since the age of

the petitioner was assessed as 22 years as on 19.02.1987, he is

entitled to continue in service upto 28.02.2026. However, the

respondents have retired the petitioner from service w.e.f.

28.02.2023 and thereby the petitioner is losing three years of

his service. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has

been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the

attention of this Court to the relevant documents i.e., the

information furnished to him under RTI Act, 2005, dated

PMD,J W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

23.02.2021 that as per the Service Card, his date of birth is

recorded as 25 years as on 19.02.1987 i.e., 19.02.1962, but as

per the CMPF Nomination in PS-3 & PS-4 his date of birth is

recorded as 12.02.1965 and as per MVCT, his age is recorded as

25 years as on 19.02.1987 i.e., 19.02.1962. It is submitted that

the doctors of the Medical Board have decided that the

petitioner is 60 years as on 06.08.2022, on his mere appearance

and not by conducting any medical examination. He also relied

upon the date of birth recorded in his Aadhar and Pan Cards.

4. Learned Standing counsel appearing for the

respondents relied upon the averments in the counter affidavit

and submitted that as per the service register record of the

petitioner at the time of initial appointment, his age has been

recorded as 25 years as on 19.02.1987 and since the petitioner

was illiterate and did not have any date of birth certificate, the

age as determined by the medical officer has been considered

and entered into service book. It is submitted that the petitioner

has been referred to the Medical Board for examination on his

request for change of his date of birth and after medical

examination, the Medical Board has assessed the age of the

petitioner as 60 years as on date of examination i.e.,

PMD,J W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

06.08.2022. Therefore, the petitioner has rightly been retired on

attaining the age of 61 years i.e., on 28.02.2023.

5. Learned Standing counsel has drawn the attention

of this Court to the various documents such as service register

wherein his date of birth is recorded as 25 years as on

19.02.1987. It is submitted that the Forms PS-3 and PS-4 are

the forms filled by the petitioner and the date of birth given by

him cannot be taken as his date of birth, as it was determined

at 25 by the medical officer at the time of his initial

appointment. He has referred to the Coal Mines Provident Fund

Form-A, wherein the date of birth was recorded as 25 years as

on 19.02.1987 and the petitioner thumb impression was

annexed thereto. It is also referred to the employee's personal

record, wherein the date of birth of the employee is recorded as

19.02.1962.

6. Learned Standing counsel also relied upon the

following judgments in support of his contentions that there

cannot be change of date of birth at the fag end of the career

i.e., at the time of retirement.

PMD,J W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

(i) Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development

Limited Vs.T.P.Nataraja and Others 1;

(ii) Bharat Coking Coal Limited and Others Vs. Shyam

Kishore Singh 2;

(iii) Rolla Sathaiah Vs. The Singareni Collieries

Company Limited and Another 3;

(iv) K.Kumaraswamy Vs. Regional Manager, APSRTC

and Others 4;

(v) Kambam Venkata Rao Vs. Chairman and Managing

Director, Singareni Collieries Company and Others 5.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a reply

affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents and

submitted that the Form PS-3 & PS-4 are prepared by the

management and therefore, the age recorded therein has to be

considered as his correct date of birth.

8. Having regard to the rival contentions and the

material on record, this Court finds that there is no dispute that

the date of birth of a person cannot be changed at the fag end of

1 (2021) 12 SCC 27 2 (2020) 3 SCC 411 3 2014 SCC Online Hyd 1145 4 (2022) SCC Online TS 2820 5 (2022) SCC Online TS 2639

PMD,J W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

his career at his request. In this case, the date of birth was

admittedly recorded as 19.02.1962 in the service record and

also in the Provident Fund account. The PS-3 is the form giving

the particulars of the family members of the petitioner and PS-4

is the nomination form for receiving the outstanding benefits

after the death of the employee while in service. These two forms

are admittedly filled in by the employee himself. However, the

service registers of the employees are maintained by the

authorities and in the employee's personal record, the date of

birth is recorded as 19.02.1962. After going through the medical

reports submitted by the respondents, it is noticed that a

detailed medical examination has been conducted on the

petitioner and the age was determined as 60 years as on

06.08.2022. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in this

writ petition and it is liable to be dismissed.

9. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. There

shall be no order as to costs.

10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ

petition, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI Date: 20.09.2023 bak

PMD,J W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

W.P.No. 7903 of 2023

Dated: 20.09.2023

bak