IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6878 of 2008 Shiva Yadav, son of Late Kishun Chand Yadav, village Nizamuddinpur, PS and district Jehanabad – Petitionerl. Vs. (1) the State of Bihar, (2) The Principal Secretary cum Commissioner, Home Department, Patna. (3) The Director General of Police (Home Guard), Patna. (4) The Dist. Magistrate, Jehanabad. (5) The Supdt. Of Police, Jehanabad. (6) The Addl. Collector (Naxal), Jehanabad. (7) The Subdivisional Officer, Jehanabad. (8) The Circle Officer, Jehanabad – Respondents. 2 27.4.2011 The controversy in this case is with respect to the date of birth of the petitioner who was appointed as a Chowkidar on 2.9.1977. At the time of appointment, the Civil Surgeon had estimated the petitioner’s date of birth as 21.3.1948 and has mentioned it in the service book. Subsequently it appears that a medical board was constituted by the order of the Additional Collector, Jehanabad and as many as 50 persons were examined. According to the medical board the petitioner’s age has been estimated to be 47 years on 31.8.2001. However, this estimate of age of the 50 persons was not entered in the service book. How the Civil Surgeon was able to estimate the exact day on which the petitioner was born is amazing, considering that the petitioner did not remember his date of birth. It appears from the counter affidavit that the District Magistrate has issued memo no. 613, dated 24.9.2003 to all the Circle Officers with respect to the date of retirement of Chowkidars and the Dafadars. The said letter indicates that persons belonging to these two categories have time and again 2 asked for constitution of a medical board in order determine their age. The District Magistrate has found that the date of birth entered in the service book should be considered to be the correct date of birth and the constitution of a medical board for the purpose of determining the age of an employee creates many difficulties and also financial loss to the Government. As far as the financial loss to the Government is concerned, I do not agree with the reasoning given by the District Magistrate when he states that it amounts to financial loss to the Government, as even if such persons like the petitioner are retired, some other incumbents will take their place and, therefore, the State Government would pay salary to them and also be paying retiral benefits etc. which are the consequence of an appointment. In the present case a medical board has already been constituted by the orders of the Additional Collector in 2005. It does not appear to be fair, to suggest that the medical board was wrongly constituted or that it was not in accordance with law. There is no challenge to the procedure and the manner in which the medical board has examined 50 persons and estimated their age as per Annexure 2. I do not see any reason why the District Magistrate should not rely on the medical board and pass orders accordingly. This is not to say that the District Magistrate will be bound by the report of the medical board. If in a particular case the physical appearance and the age recorded by the medical board does not appear in consonance with the estimate made by the board, it will always be open to the District Magistrate concerned 3 to pass appropriate orders in such cases. I, therefore, remand the matter back to the District Magistrate, Jehanabad to take a decision with respect to the petitioner by calling for a report of the medical board to see whether the board had been duly constituted and was qualified for the purpose for which it was constituted and then take a decision regarding the petitioner. The petitioner may file a representation before the District Magistrate, Jehanabad within a period of six weeks. The District Magistrate will dispose of the representation within four months thereafter. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)