CL<^ i KN6LE BENCH ^. IN THE HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No'."/201l. ^% PETITIONER: Dudhnath Yadav S/o Rambali Yadav, aged about 57 years, presently posted as the "Sr.P.S.A." in Rajendra UG Mine of the Sohagpur Area of the South Eastem Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS ^ RESPONDENTS: \ ....•• 1,6 (.'.•••" ,...••" ^^-" <'"' •^ ^ / 01. South Eastern Coal Fields Limited Through their Chairman cum Managing Director, SECL Head Quarters, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, C.G. / 02. The Director (Personnel), South Eastem Coalfields Lunited Through their Managing Director, SECL Head Quarters, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. /-03. Superintendent/ Manager, Rajendra UG Mine, Sohagpur Area of South Eastem Coal Fields Limited, P.0. Khairaha, District: Shahdol, M.P. ^04. Personnel Manager, Rajendra UG Mine, Sohagpur Area of South Eastem Coal Fields Limited, P.0. Khairaha, District: Shahdol, M.P. WRIT PETITION U7A226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA '"L^?^ I-HC—78 '3TI^?T ^T f<^H ^!?T STT^TsRWqR' ^Q ^7 's^t •^i'^itf^, »Til'M<i6, f®i<ni+iy,< *<l*ldT ttlW^i —..w..-?..-.^.)...'v^..: Wl 200 sn^l TT5Rr ('j'lt^i^) TOIIW ^ifer an^r SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra Moh^ 22-06-2011 Shri Rajkamal Singh, couns^i for the petitioner. Shri Shivshankar Tiwari, coilnsel forthe respondents. This Detition has been filed 2/3/2011 issued by respondent No.p. ^i|1')Trf'ifl'1 'RTO^ff tf fe^ ^-(-^K ^73ifiPT3D^r n Shrivastava. J. by the petitioner aggnevea Dy oraer aatea The main grievance of th recorded in the service records is ^ petitioner is that the date of birth, as iincorrect. it has also been averred in the writ petition that the SECL mana^ement was considering the case of the petitioner and on 14/12/05, it \|vas Jnformed by the Generai Manager (industrial Reiations) SECL, Biiaspur to the petitioners Trade Union that the issues pertaining to age deterrrjination of the petiiioner and few other empiovees was under consideratibn and the information is being coilected from the concerned areas. Howl matter of determination of age, in respondents to seek instructionsj been considered and decided. Tit prays for some more time. Considering the nature of| ^ver,. no finai decision was taken in the matter, according to the impiemer|tation instruction No.76, applicable in the case of dispute and without any decision, the petitioner was retired on 31/3/2p1 1. On 4/4/2011, two weeks' tir|ne was granted to iearned counset for the as to why the appiication/case of the petitioner, pending before the A^e Determination Committee, has not yet day, learned counsel for the respondents grievances raised by the petitioner and specific avermenis made in tife petition that the matter reiating to determination of age has remaineiti pending without aecision / determination, T^ + .^eT-''-. /s^\. '''SBfc. S "ws'm 9 / •^^•^ ^' XI-HC—78 sn^r ^r fi;-ti<* tTqT 37T^?T sh*liqi Deepii 'S^ '^l'^lciq, ®ti1^1<o,fqcll-Hy ^_tA3-f-©lAfl.l^6f/'? *11HWI tb*llcb""^ 200 3TI^?T 'q'RT ('^f3«I^(T) TCnw^feisn^i _^- cotne thit' no rruitrui purpose wouia De serveip when the resDondents have not Accordingly, it is directed petitioner shaii be decided by as possibie, considering that the i|ietiti The decision / determination shal reievant guiaeiines ana instruction^ As the matter relating to determin^tion for a long time without anv decisl matter shail be taken expeditious) date or receipt of copy of this orde4 With the aforesaid aisposea on. erveip keeping the petition pending, particulariy, with any instruction, tii! date. the dispute reiating to date of birth of the respt>ndent No.1 / competent authority as eariy dietitioner has aireadv retired from service. be made strictiv, in accordance with the ction^ retating to determination of date of birth. of date of birth has remained pending |on, it is directed that the decision in the jy, within a period of six months from the <=hl<l[<n<fll 'RFMf "^f 'fecet <Fq^K ^'siRiiian^i obsert/ations/directions, the petition is finaliy Sd./- Ma*iin<^a Mohan Shrivastava Judge