IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 6350 of 2008. Reserved on: 18.07.2011. Decided on: 08.08.2011. _____________________________________________________ Parsini Devi and others. …Petitioners. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge: Original petitioner, namely, Sher Singh (hereinafter referred to as “the petitioner” for convenience sake) was engaged as Beldar in the year, 1979. He died during the pendency of this petition and his L.Rs./legal representatives were brought on record. He was given work charge status as Beldar w.e.f. 03.01.1995. It appears from the record that one Shri Santokh Singh has filed a complaint against the petitioner, stating therein that since the petitioner’s younger brothers, namely, Shri Balwant Singh and Shri Gandharab Singh had already retired from service on 28.02.1995 and 30.4.2002 after attaining the age of superannuation, petitioner could not continue beyond 60 years, the age of superannuation. Petitioner was called upon vide letter dated 20.09.2002 to explain his position within seven days. Petitioner filed reply to the same vide Annexure A-3 on 27.09.2002. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - Petitioner was again called upon to explain his case vide letter dated 03.10.2002 (Annexure A-4). He was again called upon vide letter dated 18.10.2002 (Annexure A-5) to explain under what circumstances, he was continuing beyond the age of 60 years. Petitioner filed the reply to the same vide Annexure A-6. The disciplinary authority after taking into consideration the replies filed by the petitioner, dismissed the petitioner vide memorandum dated 18.11.2002. 2. Mr. Bimal Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that a regular inquiry was required to be instituted against his client to ascertain the actual date of birth. According to him, his client has not attained the age of 60 years. 3. Mr. Vikas Rathore, learned Deputy Advocate General has strenuously argued that the petitioner had been given ample opportunities to explain his case by referring to the date of birth of his younger brothers, who have retired on 28.02.1995 and 30.4.2002 after attaining the age of superannuation from National Fertilizers Ltd., Naya Nangal. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. 5. Petitioner was engaged as Beldar in the year, 1979. On the basis of a complaint filed by one Shri Santokh Singh, he has been called upon to give the exact date of birth of his younger brothers, namely, Shri Balwant Singh and Shri Gandharab Singh, who have retired on 28.02.1995 and 30.04.2002 after attaining the age of superannuation. Petitioner insisted that his age has been determined by a Medical Board constituted by the Chief Medical Officer. Thereafter, again the - 3 - petitioner has been given an opportunity vide letter dated 03.10.2001 (Annexure A-4) to explain under what circumstances, he was continuing beyond the age of 60 years, though his younger brothers stood retired on 28.02.1995 and 30.4.2002 after attaining the age of superannuation from National Fertilizers Ltd., Naya Nangal. He filed reply to the same vide Annexure A-6. It is evident from the contents of Annexure A-7 that the respondent No. 2 has written a letter to the Deputy Manager (Personnel), National Fertilizers Ltd., Naya Nangal to seek the details of retirement of his younger brothers. The Deputy Manager (Personnel) has informed the Assistant Engineer, I.P.H. Sub-Division, Mehatpur that younger brother of the petitioner, namely, Shri Balwant Singh has retired from service on 28.02.1995 after attaining the age of superannuation, i.e., 58 years and second younger brother of the petitioner, namely, Shri Gandharab Singh has also retired on 30.04.2002, as his date of birth was 15.04.1944. The Assistant Engineer has also sought information from the Revenue Authorities to ascertain whether S/Shri Balwant Singh and Gandharab Singh were the younger brothers of the petitioner or not. This was certified by the Revenue Authorities that S/Shri Balwant Singh and Gandharab Singh were his younger brothers as per the information supplied by the Patwari, Patwar Circle, Bangarh dated 15.11.2002. The Assistant Engineer has also ascertained the age of the petitioner from the details of date of birth given in the Pariwar register. According to him, the petitioner was more than 60 years as on 15.11.2002. It is also evident from the contents of memorandum dated 18.11.2002 that the petitioner - 4 - has submitted in his written statement on 09.10.2002 and dated nil that the age of his brothers might be wrongly written by someone. Petitioner could have submitted the details of date of birth of his younger brother to the competent authority once he has been called upon to do so. He could also substantiate his date of birth on the basis of Panchayat record. It is strange that a person whose younger brothers had already retired after attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.1995 and 30.04.2002, was continuing in the Government employment. The petitioner has been only conferred the work charge status and no regular enquiry was required to be instituted against him. He has been given ample opportunity to explain his position by referring to the date of birth of his younger brothers, who stood retired in 1995 and 2002. He has been dealt with in a just and fair manner by the respondent-department. 6. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge August 08, 2011. (bhupender) - 5 - `