WPSS/472/2019
2022 Latest Caselaw 627 UK

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                           AT NAINITAL
             ON THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
                                  BEFORE:
       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

            Writ Petition (S/S) No. 472 of 2019

BETWEEN:
Jaswant Singh.                                                ...Petitioner
      (By Ms. Charanjeet Kaur, Advocate)


AND:
The Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mills Ltd.                           ...Respondent
      (By Mr. T.A. Khan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Divya Jaiswal, Advocate,
      holding brief of Mr. Vinay Bhatt, Advocate)



                               JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. According to the petitioner, his date of birth has been wrongly recorded in his service record.

3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought following relief:-

"i. Issue a writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions particularly to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to make specific rectification or amendment in their record regarding the date of birth of the petitioner, by correcting the Date of Birth of the petitioner as 16-09-1965 in place of date of date of birth wrongly shown in the record as 16-09-1959 forthwith, or within such reasonable time as granted by this Court ."

4. Petitioner is an employee of Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill Limited. A counter affidavit has been filed by Mr. R.K. Seth, General Manager, Kisan Sahkari Chini Mill, Nadehi, District Udham Singh Nagar. Annexure-1 to the said counter affidavit is the standing order applicable to the employees of respondent-Sugar Mill. Clause LL(4) of the said standing order is reproduced below:

"LL-4. The management shall give at least one month's notice to a workman before retiring him and during this period the workman shall have the right to represent to the Labour Commissioner, U.P.

Kanpur. Such representation shall normally be disposed of within a period of six weeks of the date of receipt of representation from the workman and the orders passed by the Labour Commissioner, U.P. regarding the question of age of workman shall be final and shall not be questioned by any party before any Court. In case the Labour Commissioner, U.P. allows the representation, the employers, shall reinstate the workman immediately on receipt of the said orders and also pay to him full wages for the period of involuntary unemployment."

5. Based on the said provision of standing order, Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent submits that petitioner has chosen a wrong forum and in case, he wants correction in his date of birth, then he should file a representation to Labour Commissioner.

6. Ms. Charanjeet Kaur, learned counsel appearing for petitioner then submits that writ petition may be disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the Competent Authority, as per standing order.

7. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file representation to the Competent Authority, in terms of the standing order. This Court hopes and expects that if petitioner makes representation to appropriate authority, then the same shall be decided, as early as possible, preferably within four months, after hearing the employer.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Navin