1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.79 OF 2009 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.79 OF 2009 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.79 OF 2009 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO.8110 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.8110 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.8110 OF 2008 The Chief General Manager (Production) M.S.E.P.G. Co.Ltd. .. Appellant vs. Govardhan Dagadu Jagtap .. Respondent Mr.A.R.S.Baxi for the appellant Mr.P.M.Pradhan i/b Mr.H.M.Inamdar for the respondent CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & Smt.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. Smt.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. Smt.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE: 19TH MARCH, 2009 DATE: 19TH MARCH, 2009 DATE: 19TH MARCH, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The appellant had challenged the order dated 3.2.09 of the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.8110 of 2000. By the said order, rule came to be granted and the learned single Judge directed that evidence be recorded before the Industrial Court on the issue of date of birth and report of the same be 2 submitted before 3 months. By the said order, the learned single Judge also directed that respondent nos.1 be allowed to continue in service. 3. Respondent no.1 had joined the appellant board as a Junior Chemist on 29.04.83. The issue in the present case is that the respondent claims that his date of birth is 1.10.51 whereas the appellant had retired him considering wrong date of birth i.e. 1.1.1951. Hence, the respondent filed a complaint u.s.28(1) r/w Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 for declaration of unfair labour practices indulged into by the respondent M.S.E.G.C.Ltd. and for granting relief of not retiring the respondent on the basis of wrong date of birth i.e. 01.01.1951. The said complaint came to be partly allowed by order 29.11.08. It was held that the correct date of birth is 1.10.1951, hence, the respondent board was directed to retire the complainant from the services of chemist from 30.09.2009. Being aggrieved thereby, writ petition no.8110 of 2008 came to be preferred. 4. It is seen that the school leaving certificate 3 of respondent no.1 shows his date of birth as 1.10.51 whereas the SSC Board Certificate shows the date of birth as 1.11.51. According to the respondent, this date was subsequently corrected by the board. In view of these facts and circumstances, the learned single Judge is right in remitting the matter back to the Industrial court on the limited point of leading evidence in relation to date of birth. We see no error or illegality in the order of the learned single Judge.L.P.A. is dismissed. In view thereof, Civil Application no.89 of 2009 does not survive. The same is also dismissed accordingly. (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (Smt.V.K.Tahilramani, J.) (Smt.V.K.Tahilramani, J.) (Smt.V.K.Tahilramani, J.)