THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15379 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner joined the service of Singareni Collieries Company Limited (for short ‘the Company’) in February, 1976. Since there did not exist any record of his date of birth, his age was assessed by the Medical Officer of the Company and it was entered as 10.11.1950. The petitioner asserts that his actual date of birth is 12.09.1953 and places reliance upon a birth certificate issued by Warangal Municipal Corporation on 02.02.2010. The respondents issued a letter, dated 08.12.2009, informing the petitioner that he will retire from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2010. The petitioner made a representation to the respondents to refer his case to the Age Determination Committee (for short ‘the Committee’). Through a communication, dated 04.06.2010, the General Manager of the Company informed the petitioner that the occasion to refer his case to the Committee does not exist, since there is no inconsistency as to the entries in various records. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the action of the respondents. He contends that a detailed procedure was prescribed by the Company to refer the cases whenever there is discrepancy as to the dates of birth and there is no justification for the respondents in not referring his case. On behalf of the respondents, a detailed counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that in all the records maintained by the Company, such as Service Book, B-Register, Coal Mines Provident Fund Nomination Form, etc., the date of birth is consistently mentioned as 10.11.1950 and in that view of the matter, the necessity to refer the case of the petitioner for further medical examination, does not arise. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The date of birth of the petitioner was assessed by a Medical Officer at the time of joining the service, since there was no proof of date of birth. It is only after the respondents informed the petitioner about his date of retirement, that the petitioner made efforts to get his case referred to the Committee. It is no doubt true that the company has framed guidelines for reference of cases of the employees to the Committee. A perusal of the same discloses that it is only when a serious discrepancy as to the entries in various records is noticed that the necessity to refer the case to the Committee would arise. In the case of the petitioner, the entries in all the records maintained by the Company are consistent. The date of birth that is entered in the Service Book, B-Register, Coal Mines Provident Fund Nomination Form and the certification by the Committee is all consistent and it is 10.11.1950. The belated submission of an application by the petitioner that too on the basis of a birth certificate which was issued as recently as in February, 2010 cannot constitute the basis for referring him to the Committee. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 25.11.2010. kdl