COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) 373/2002 (Old No. 3103 of 1998) General Manager, Dehradun Dugdha Utpadak Sangh Ltd., Rampur Road, Dehradun. …….Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dehradun & Others. …….Respondents Sri V.K. Bist, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner. Sri Gopal Narain, learned Brief Holder for the State. None for the respondent no. 3/1 & 3/2. 27th June, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the award dated 23.6.1997 passed by the Labour Court in reference case no. 52 of 1996, which is contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition, whereby the workman’s retirement w.e.f. 24.6.1995 was held to be illegal and the petitioner was directed to reinstate the workman with back wages. 2. Facts, in brief, are that the workman was appointed as Tester/Bill Clerk on 17.4.1971 in the department of the petitioner. His date of birth as recorded in his service book is 11.1.1940. He was due to be retired on 11.1.1998 on attaining the age of superannuation, whereas vide order dated 7.6.1995, the workman was retired by his employer w.e.f. 24.6.1995 before attaining the age of 58 2 years. In these facts and circumstances, the following reference was made: Whether the action of the employer in terminating the services of its workman Sri Ilam Singh S/o Sri Bhullan Singh from the post of Tester w.e.f. 24.6.1995 is valid and legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to get? 3. The date of birth as recorded in the service book of the petitioner is 11.1.1940. On account of some objections raised by the audit party, the workman was asked to submit the proof in support of his date of birth. The workman submitted the certificates of his educational qualification in order to prove his date of birth. But the same were disbelieved by the petitioner on account of some technical reasons. The workman was charged with an allegation that he had made interpolation in his service book as at the time of preparing his service book, the date of birth of the workman was not recorded therein. Accordingly, the workman was ordered to be retired w.e.f. 24.6.1995. Undisputedly, petitioner was not medically examined and no opinion of medical experts was taken by the petitioner before issuing the order of his retirement nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the workman to submit his explanation. The certificates of educational qualification submitted by the workman in support of his date of birth were not cross-checked with the institution. 4. The Labour Court, after taking into consideration all the documentary and oral evidence available on record, has recorded a clear cut finding that action of the 3 employer in terminating the services of the workman w.e.f. 24.6.1995 was invalid and illegal. I do not find any illegality or perversity in the award of the Labour Court. The award of the Labour Court is based on sound evidence and settled legal proposition. 5. For the reasons recorded above, the writ petition being devoid of merit is dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs. The amount deposited by the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated 2.4.1999 shall be released in favour of the substituted legal heirs of the workman within a period of one month. (P.C. Verma, J.) 27.6.2008 Prabodh