1. This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing impugned notice under Ref. No.RG2/GDK81NC/2013/908, dated 01.01.2013 reducing the petitioner’s service by 26 months as on 30.06.2014 under the guise of superannuation as illegal, contrary to NCWAII-JBCCI age determination rules and violative of Section 9A & 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act and Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to rectify the error by incorporating the petitioner’s date of birth as 08.08.1956 and continue him in service upto 30.06.2016.

2. Heard Smt.G.Sudha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Nandigam Krishnarao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. According to the petitioner, he joined the service of the respondent Company as Badli Filler on 09.04.1979. Subsequently, he was appointed as Coal Filler in the year 1981 and was allotted an Employee Code No.1132054. According to the petitioner, he studied I to X class in Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Gudur, Janagam Taluq, Warangal District from 26.06.1961 to 22.06.1972 and he submitted his personal particulars including his Transfer Certificate issued by the Head Master of the School wherein his date of birth was mentioned as 08.08.1956 to the recruiting officials. The recruiting officials took out a copy from the original and returned the original to the petitioner. Thereafter, they sent him for medical examination to find out whether he is medically fit for carrying on duties in the underground mines as Badli Filler. Having found him physically fit, the petitioner was appointed as Badli Filler on 09.04.1979. The officials of the respondent company obtained his finger impressions and also signatures on the sheets of a blank book stating that they would fill up the entries later. It is stated that the respondents had never shown any of the entries to the petitioner till date and petitioner was under bona fide impression that the respondent company officials have recorded all particulars correctly including the date of birth in accordance with the certificates submitted by him at the time of his initial appointment.

4. It is submitted by the petitioner that the respondents issued him the impugned notice dated 01.01.2013 directing him to retire on 30.06.2014. It is submitted that for the first time after service of the impugned notice the petitioner came to know that the respondent officials wrongly entered his aged as 28 years as on 26.06.1982 instead of 26 years as per his Transfer Certificate. The date of birth recorded by the officials of the respondent company is not in accordance with the school records and they perpetuated the wrong unilaterally as to which the petitioner has no knowledge at all. On the date of service of the impugned notice, the petitioner was working as Shot Firer in the respondent company.

5. The version of the petitioner is that his date of birth is 08.08.1956 as per the Transfer Certificate issued by the Head Master of the School, in normal course, he has to be continued in service till 07.08.2016 and will have to be superannuated on 30.06.2016 as per the procedure in vogue. He states that since he produced the Transfer Certificate at the time of his initial appointment, the respondents have no right to get his age determined under the guise of medical examination and there is no record to show that the petitioner was sent for age assessment.

6. It is submitted that the respondents have issued a Circular dated 01.08.1988 which obligates them to ask the petitioner who is an employee of the respondent company to submit documents relating to the date of birth before taking a decision as to the correct date of birth of the petitioner, but the respondents have violated the circular as well as the bipartite agreement. Thus, the petitioner questions the action of the respondents in directing him to retire 26 months earlier to his actual date o