IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT : PRESENT : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE: L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 5044 of 2008 Between: Koona Ankusaiah, S/o. Pochaiah. ..... Petitioner AND 1. Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Kothagudem, Khammam District. 2. The General Manager, RG-II Area, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. 3. The Dy. General Manager, GDK-9 Incline, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: i. declare the impugned proceeding No. RG2/Per/38-A/CF/117 dt. 11-1-2008 issued by the 2nd respondent and consequential notice No. RG2/GDK-9/07/WO/116 dt. 9/11-1-2008 issued by the 3rd respondent are illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same. ii. Consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service upto 31-3-2012. The Petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K.Vasudeva Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Sri Nandigama Krishna Rao – S.C. on behalf of the Respondents. The Court made the following ORDER: “ The controversy in this writ petition is about the age/date of birth of the petitioner. He was employed as Badli Filler on 09-03-1979. Obviously because he is illiterate, his age was entered in the concerned records as 31 years, as on 09-03-1979. According to that age, the petitioner would be liable to retire on 31-03-2008. The petitioner made an application, dated. 16-12-2006, to the second respondent, stating that his age, as on the date of entry into service, was 25 years, going by his appearance, and that the age, as entered in the service records, is to be modified. The petitioner was subjected to examination by the Area Age Determination Committee, on a reference made by then Deputy General Manager vide his proceedings, dated. 14-03-2007. The Committee, in turn, vide its letter, dated. 20-03-2007, certified that the age of the petitioner as on that date was 55 years. The matter, however, was examined by superior officials and on finding that the prescribed procedure was not followed, the petitioner was subjected to examination by the same Committee once again. Through its letter, dated. 26-12-2007, the Committee certified that the petitioner is 31 years old as on 09-03-1979. ..2.. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and on perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that the prescribed procedure was not followed, while considering the application submitted by the petitioner. Though an employee is entitled to make an application as to alteration of date of birth, the necessary supporting material is required to be produced and the procedure prescribed by the relevant Rules is to be followed. The Officer, who referred the case of the petitioner to the Area Age Determination Committee, is said to be not in service. To avoid complications in the matter, this Court is of the view that various orders passed from time to time, including the reports submitted by the Committee on 20-03-2007 and 26-12-2007 need to be ignored and the matter be processed afresh. Hence, the respondents are directed to process the application of the petitioner, dated. 16-12-2006, afresh, and take necessary steps in accordance with law, within a period of ten days from today. The petitioner shall be continued in service till the next date of hearing and the manner in which his continuance beyond 31-03-2008, would depend upon the out come of the exercise indicated above. Post the matter ‘for Judgment’ on 04-04-2008 in the motion list.” ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Kothagudem, Khammam District. 2. The General Manager, RG-II Area, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. 3. The Dy. General Manager, GDK-9 Incline, Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. 4. One CC to Sri K.Vasudeva Reddy, Advocate(OPUC) 5. One spare copy. SAH HIGH COURT LNRJ DATED: 25-03-2008 NOTE: POST THE MATTER ‘FOR JUDGMENT’ ON 04-04-2008 IN THE MOTION LIST ORDER WP.NO. 5044 OF 2008 DIRECTION DRAFTED BY: SAH APPROVED BY: DRAFTED ON: 25-03-2008 HIGH COURT LNRJ DATED: 25-03-2008 NOTE: POST THE MATTER ‘FOR JUDGMENT’ ON 04-04-2008 IN THE MOTION LIST ORDER WP.NO. 5044 OF 2008 DIRECTION