THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No. 22282 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner joined the service of the Singarene Collieries Company Limited, on 09-02-1976. Obviously because the petitioner did not produce any certificate in proof of his date of birth, his age was assessed by the Medical Officer, and it was mentioned as 25 years as on 21-12-1975, and the date of birth as 21-12-1950. This was entered in the service book, ‘B’ register, Coal Mines P.F. Nomination Form ‘A’, etc. The petitioner states that on a representation made by him, the date of birth was corrected as 25-05-1955, on the basis of a certificate issued by the school, where he studied, and still, he was subjected to medical examination on 21-11-2009. It is stated that the Medical Board (for short ‘the Board’) assessed his age as 59 years as on 21- 11-2009, and is sought to be retired from service. He contends that on an application made by him, earlier to that, the Board assessed his age as 53 years as on 15-04-2005, and there is no basis for the respondents to alter the same. The respondents filed a detailed counter-affidavit, opposing the writ petition. It is stated that the date of birth was consistently mentioned in all the records as 21-12-1950, but the entry in some of the records was altered, without any attestation or initial. The respondents state that, in the recent past, as many as 700 cases of fraudulent alterations of dates of birth were noticed, and all of them were scrutinized, and the employees were subjected to medical examination, once again. The report of the medical examination, said to have been issued in favour of the petitioner, in the year 2005, is said to be fictitious and fraudulent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner does not dispute the fact that in all the records maintained by the Company, his date of birth was mentioned as 21-12- 1950. According to him, the date of birth was changed in the year 2005, after subjecting him to medical examination and verifying the certificate issued by the school. If the alteration was proper and genuine, he is entitled to remain in service, till he attains the age of superannuation, as per that date. The respondents have categorically stated that the so-called corrections and entries made in the year 2005 were fraudulent. The petitioner is not able to say anything to the contrary. To be fair to the petitioner, the respondents have subjected him to medical examination, and on the basis of the X-ray analysis, etc., the Board found him to be 59 years of age, in the year 2009. The petitioner did not challenge those proceedings, and he insists that the respondents be directed to act according to the fraudulent entries. This Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.29-11-2010. KO