Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
B.Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The Singareni Collieries company Ltd and others - Respondents
W.P. No. 15687 of 2016
Decided on : 06-12-2022
Date of Birth - Employment Dispute - JBCCI rules - [JBCCI guidelines, Article 14, 16, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of the respondent company, filed a writ petition seeking correction of his date of birth in the service records, which was recorded incorrectly by the respondents. The petitioner contended that his correct date of birth was 05.04.1960, as per the Transfer Certificate issued by the ZPCC school Mandamarri, but the respondents had recorded it as 03.07.1957. The respondents argued that the date of birth recorded in the service records, based on the assessment by the Colliery Medical Officer, was final and authentic.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not submit any documentary evidence of his date of birth at the time of initial appointment, and the medical report had fixed his age as 20 years as on 03.07.1977. The court also noted that the petitioner had realized the mistake in his date of birth after a period of more than 35 years and had superannuated by the end of July 2017. The court directed the respondents to reconsider the issue of date of birth, giving due opportunity to the petitioner and complying with the principles of natural justice.
Issues: The main issue was the correction of the petitioner's date of birth in the service records, and whether the date of birth recorded based on the medical report was final and authentic.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the date of birth recorded in the service records was based on the assessment by the Colliery Medical Officer and was considered final and authentic, the petitioner should be given an opportunity to resolve the dispute of date of birth through due enquiry and in compliance with principles of natural justice.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondents to reconsider the issue of date of birth, giving due opportunity to the petitioner and taking a decision afresh within a period of 4 weeks, in accordance with the law and communicating the reasoned order to the petitioner.
ORDER :
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Labour.
2. This writ petition is filed to issue a writ or writs more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not rectifying its mistake of not incorporating the correct date of birth 05.04.1960 as per the Transfer Certificate issued by the ZPCC school Mandamarri as per JBCCI rules and continuing the wrong entry of 03.07.1957 in service records and basing on wrong entries issuing impugned order ref.No.RG3/OC2/W/30, dated 14.02.2013 is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India consequently permit the petitioner to continue in service till 30.04.2020.
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:
a) The petitioner was initially appointed in the 1st respondent company as casual employee on 01.08.1978. In the year 1994-95 after acquiring knowledge to work on dumpers, the petitioner was promoted as Dumper Operator and posted at RG3 OCP 2 and was awarded ‘A’ Grade wage since 2010.
b) The petitioner belongs to Madiga S.C. community, and is born on 05.04.1960, and failed X class in the year 1976. The petitioner passed 7th class Board examination in the year 1973-74 and date of birth was mentioned as 05.04.1960.
c) The 2nd respondent issued notice to all workmen, if there is any discrepancy in their age as per records, to make representation with necessary documentary proof. While travelling the petitioner lost marks memo and transfer certificate and hence, applied for duplicate and obtained. The petitioner came to know in the year 2013 that in the another service book, his age was recorded by the respondents as 20 years and date of birth is 03.03.1977.
d) The petitioner made a representation in the month of January, 2013 to the respondents to rectify the mistakes that had rept in the B register. Instead of rectifying the mistake, the respondents issued impugned order ref No.RG3/OC2/W/30, dated 14.02.2013 that his date of birth is 03.05.1957 and the petitioner is retiring on 31.07.2017.
e) The petitioner filed application under RTI Act on 11.03.2016 and obtained copy of service record along with covering letter dated 04.04.2016. Instead of furnishing original service record prepared on 03.07.1977, the respondent officials furnished service record prepared on 18.08.1987, wherein the respondent officials entered wrong date of birth. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.
4. The counter affidavit filed by the respondents, in brief, is as follows:
a) At the time of initial appointment, the petitioner did not submit any documentary evidence in proof of his age/date of birth, and as such, his age was assessed by the then Colliery Medical Officer as 20 years as on 03.07.1977 in the initial medical examination report, which was converted as his date of birth as 03.07.1947 and the same was recorded in the service records of the petitioner.
b) Once the age or date of birth recorded in the service records basing on the age as assessed by the then colliery Medical Officer in the initial medical examination report, the same is authentic and final. Therefore, the date of birth already recorded in the authentic records, cannot be changed just basing on the educational qualification certificates.
c) The respondent company is bound to follow the guidelines/instructions issued from time to time by the Central and State Governments and other governmental bodies constituted like the Joint Bipartite Committee for Coal Industry.
Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
PERUSED THE RECORD :
5. A bare perusal of the order impugned dated 14.02.2013 of the 2nd respondent reads as under :
6. Paras 8, 9 an
The main legal point established in the judgment is that requests for correction of date of birth at the fag end of a career must be supported by irrefutable proof and evidence of real injustice, and....
Correction of date of birth in service records is not a matter of right and is subject to procedural and timely constraints, particularly if raised at the fag end of service.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
