1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 937/2010. Siddhu Ramlal Prasad … versus … Western Coalfields Limited and another Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 26, 2010. Heard Shri S.V. Sirpurkar, learned counsel for petitioner. Petitioner / plaintiff who was aware of his recorded date of birth since 18.11.1994 gave notice of suit in the year 2007 and filed suit vide Regular Civil Suit No. 278/2008. Contention is, his correct date of birth is 18.07.1954 and it was so recorded in the service book and by negligence or some other act on the part of the officer of respondent, it has been changed to15.02.1950. The learned counsel contends that in such situation, when the document issued by respondent itself demonstrates that date of birth was 18.07.1954, retirement as per his alleged recorded date of birth i.e. 15.02.1950 will be against public interest. The Trial Court as also the Appellate Court have considered the controversy. Civil Suit filed by the petitioner / plaintiff is still pending. In this situation, though the petitioner could have taken steps well within time to stop 2 his retirement by obtaining necessary decree from Civil Court, he haw waited till last moment to approach the Court of law. I find that the Courts below have found that there are certain documents which shows the recorded date of birth as 15.02.1950. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. However, the proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 278/.2008 are expedited and the trial Court is directed to decide the same as early as possible and in any case by 31.1.2011. With this directions Writ Petition is disposed of. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.