General Manager, Bharat Coking Coal LTD. vs Shib Kumar Dushad

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Mines Act, 1952 - Determination of date of birth - Interference by High Court - Where dispute over date of birth is raised long after joining service and determined by employer following prescribed procedure, the High Court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction should not interfere unless there is a patent arithmetical or typographical error. (Paras 14 and 16)

(B) Evidence for correction of birth date - Burden of proof lies heavily on the employee to produce clinching evidence to displace service records - Certificates based on self-declaration without statutory inquiry by competent authority carry little weight - Late claims for correction should be viewed with caution as they affect promotional avenues of juniors. (Paras 14, 15, 17 and 18)

(C) Minimum age of employment - Any revised date of birth must be consistent with the statutory minimum age requirement for employment under the relevant act at the time of joining. (Para 14)

Facts of the case:
An employee joined service in 1960 with his birth year recorded as 1932 in the service register. Long after joining, the employee claimed his birth date was in 1946 based on certain certificates. The employer, following internal instructions, referred the matter to a Medical Board, which determined his birth year as 1936. The employee challenged this in the High Court, which ordered the date to be corrected to 1946, later modified by a Division Bench to ensure the employee met the minimum statutory entry age.

Findings of Court:
The High Court erred in interfering with the date of birth as determined by the employer. The certificates relied upon were not conclusive and the claim was made at the fag end of the service.

Issues: Whether the High Court under Article 226 is the appropriate forum for determining disputed questions of fact regarding an employee's date of birth when the employer has followed the prescribed procedure.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a patent clerical error, High Courts should not exercise discretionary jurisdiction to alter birth dates entered in service records, especially when such claims are raised near retirement. The burden of producing irrefutable proof lies with the employee. Interference disrupts the legitimate expectations of junior employees regarding promotion.

Result: Appeal allowed.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Dispute over employee's date of birth recorded in service records and subsequent determination by employer's Medical Board. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )

2. Employee claimed date of birth from later certificates; employer relied on original records and Medical Board report as per service instructions. (Para 10 , 11 )

3. High Court should not interfere in writ jurisdiction with employer's date of birth determination, especially when raised long after service entry and at fag end. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18 )

4. Courts must be slow to correct date of birth long after service entry; employee bears heavy burden to produce clinching evidence of wrong recording. (Para 15 , 17 , 18 )

5. Appeal allowed; High Court's judgment set aside; writ petition dismissed; employee not entitled to service benefits beyond original superannuation. (Para 20 )

6. When should a High Court refuse to entertain a writ petition for correction of date of birth?

When the claim is raised at the fag end of service, especially if no objection was taken earlier, due to acquiescence, delay, and laches. (Para 18 )

7. What is the standard of proof required for an employee to obtain correction of date of birth in service records?

The employee must produce evidence of a clinching and conclusive nature; mere plausible claims are insufficient. (Para 15 , 17 )

8. Can a statutory certificate of date of birth, such as a mining sirdarship certificate, be treated as conclusive proof of date of birth?

No; if the entry was based solely on the holder's declaration without independent inquiry by the issuing authority, it carries little weight in disputes. (Para 14 )

9. What principles govern an employer's determination of an employee's date of birth under service rules?

If no prescribed documents exist, the employer may refer the matter to a Medical Board; the Board's evaluation, if accepted by the employer, should not be lightly interfered with. (Para 14 , 16 )

JUDGMENT

D.P.MOHAPATRA, J.

(1) LEAVE granted. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2) BHARAT Coking Coal Ltd., which is a Government company and a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd., was the employer of the respondent, Shri Shib Kumar Dushad (hereinafter referred to as the "respondent"). The company through] its General Manager, Chanch Victoria Area, Post Barakar, District Burdwan, West Bengal, has filed the present appeal. The controversy raised in the case centres round the date of birth of the respondent.

(3) THE respondent was initially employed in Chirkunda Coal Company which was under private ownership. At the time of entry into service, the year of birth of the said respondent, was entered in Form "B" register maintained under the Mines Act, 1952, as 1932. On the coming into force of the Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, 1973. the ownership of the coal mines in which the respondent was; employed, vested absolutely in the Central Government; and thereafter-it was transferred to the appellant, free from all encumbrances. The service of the respondent was taken over and the service records including Form "B"; register relating to the respondent were handed over by the erstwhile management to the appellant. As the year of birth of the respondent was entered in Form "B" register as 1932, he was to superannuate in 1992. The said entry of; the date of birth as carried over to the Form "B" register maintained by the appellant.

(4) IN 1973, the respondent acquired certificates of Gas Testing and Mining Sirdarship having come out successfully in the examinations conducted by the Director-General of Mines Safety. On the basis of the particulars submitted by the said respondent, February 9. 1946, was mentioned as his date of birth in the certificate. In 1987-88, when the appellant was in the process of preparing records of the employees whose services had been taken over under the Coal Mines Nationalisation Act, the respondent, relying on the aforementioned certificates claimed his date of birth to be February 9, 1946. In view of the apparent discrepancy in the date of birth of the respondent entered in Form "B" register maintained under the Mines Act and the date mentioned in the Gas Testing and Mining Sirdarship certificates, the appellant as per the terms of the settlement arrived at between the management and the union representing workmen of the company- requested its Medical Board to determine the correct age of the respondent and asked the said respondent to appear before the Medical Board. The Medical Board, on examining the respondent, determined his age to be 52 years as on October 13, 1988. On the basis of the report of the Medical Board the date of birth of the respondent was taken as October 13, 1936, and the date of his superannuation as October 10, 1996.

(5) AFTER about three years the respondent filed the writ petition bearing No. 3537 of 1991 before the Calcutta High Court seeking, inter alia, a direction to the appellant to enter his date of birth as February 9, 1946. He placed reliance on the certificates of Mining Sirdarship and overmanship granted by the Director- General of Mines Safety. The learned single Judge of the High Court disposed of the writ petition by the order dated January 20, 1994, directing the appellant to consider the representation of the respondent for correction of his date of birth. On March 14, 1994, the respondent made an application for correction of his date of birth as February 9, 1946. Considering the said application of the respondent, the appellant, by the order dated May 21/25. 1994, communicated its decision that there was no ground to reopen the question of the date of birth.

(6) THE respondent filed another writ petition. Civil Writ Petition No. 2717 of 1994 before the Calcutta High Court seeking a writ/order for cancellation and withdrawal of the order dated May 21/25, 1994, and to direct correction of his date of bir

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2000 Supreme(SC) 1728

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.P.Mohapatra : M.B.Shah
General Manager, Bharat Coking Coal Limited
Versus
Shib Kumar Dushad
Case No. : 6142 of 2000
Date of Decision : 11/2/00
Advocates Appeared: Gupta Sudha : Rajpal Sandhya : Rao B.Kanta : Sachthey Anip

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

6. When should a High Court refuse to entertain a writ petition for correction of date of birth?

7. What is the standard of proof required for an employee to obtain correction of date of birth in service records?

8. Can a statutory certificate of date of birth, such as a mining sirdarship certificate, be treated as conclusive proof of date of birth?

9. What principles govern an employer's determination of an employee's date of birth under service rules?

Judicial Analysis

2000 Supreme(SC) 1728

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAD.P.Mohapatra : M.B.ShahGeneral Manager, Bharat Coking Coal LimitedVersusShib Kumar DushadCase No. : 6142 of 2000Date of Decision : 11/2/00Advocates Appeared: Gupta Sudha : Rajpal Sandhya : Rao B.Kanta : Sachthey Anip

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

6. When should a High Court refuse to entertain a writ petition for correction of date of birth?

7. What is the standard of proof required for an employee to obtain correction of date of birth in service records?

8. Can a statutory certificate of date of birth, such as a mining sirdarship certificate, be treated as conclusive proof of date of birth?

9. What principles govern an employer's determination of an employee's date of birth under service rules?

Cases Referred (3)

Judicial Analysis

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.P.Mohapatra : M.B.Shah
General Manager, Bharat Coking Coal Limited
Versus
Shib Kumar Dushad
Case No. : 6142 of 2000
Date of Decision : 11/2/00
Advocates Appeared: Gupta Sudha : Rajpal Sandhya : Rao B.Kanta : Sachthey Anip