/<A^ d^ io^7. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER: VERSUS RESPONDENTS: A^vo-"'^<.. ^^y . ^-"^"'"0-v"' ^:^ ^,y ' WRIT PETITION (Sendce Matter) No. /2010 ^f(S) io 4^/P^D Shobha Rarri S/o Santoo Ram, aged about^^4 years, presently posted as the "Clipman?? in Rajendra UG Mine of the Rajendra/ Navgaon Sub Area of the Sohagpur Area of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Permanent Resident of Village: Vidyadih, P.0. Sonloharsi, District: Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ^ 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 Eastern Coalfields Limited Through their Managing Director, SECL Head Quarters, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 03. Superintendent/ Manager, Rajendra UG Mine, Sohagpur Area of South Eastern Coal Fields Limited, P.0. Khairaha, District: Shahdol, M.P. 04. Personnel Manager, Rajendra UG Mine, Sohagpur Area of South Eastern Coal Fields Limited, P.0. Khairaha, District: Shahdol, M.P. WRIT PETITION U/ART. 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE^BN^L: HON»BLESHRI MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA.J. PBTITIONER Writ Petition (Sl No.1045/2010 Shobha Ram Versus RB8PONDBNT8 South Eastera Coal Fields Limited & ofhers Petitiou u/A 226 ofthe C^>astitution oflndia Appearance: Shri Rajkaaial Singh, counsel for fhe petitioner, Shri Abhishek Siaha, counsel for respondents. 'ORAL-QRDBR. . (Passed on 20.7.2010) Heard. 2. The grievaace of fhe petitioner as raised ni this petition is wifh regard to uon-consideration of his representation for correction of his date of birth as claimed by hmi, It has been stated ia the petition tiiat the record niaintamed by fhe respondents, entitied tiie petitioner to coutin.ue in. service uptiU 30th June 2016, treatmg his date ofbiith as 1.7,1956. It is subin.itted that the petitiouer niade a representation on 13.2.2010, to the Drrector, Personnel, South Eastein Coalfields Liaiited, Bilaspur, fhiough proper channel, but fhe saiae has not been enquii'ed into axid the petitioner has beeu retired on 30th June, 2010 treating his date offirth as 1st July, 1950. 3. On ttie other haady subraission of learaed counsel for respondents is tliat earUer ia fhe year 1987, petitioner in his own haadwritmg -2- (S) Pi-aveen inaiatained his date ofbirth as 1,7.1950. It is also subniitted tiliat ia statutory Formi-B Register also, date ofbirth offhe petitioaer has been recorded as 1.7,1950. 4. Froia fhe averments niade ia fhe petition aad in the retum, there appears to be a dispute with regard to fhe date of birth of tlie petitioner. It is also found fhat the representation which was laade by fhe petitioner seekmg aa appropriate enquuy for determiaation of his correct date ofbtrtli has not been enquired iato. 5. In the case of Dauram Chandra Vs. South Basterii Ctoalfields Ltd. and others [W.P. (S) No.6697/2008] decided on 28.6.2010, this Court ia simUar circurastaiices, directed fhe respondents to consider fhe dispute accordnig to ftie available poUcy ofdetermiaation ofage. 6. Therefore, I am incluied to issue a direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representatioa dated 13.2,2010 m accordaace with the existing poUcy relatmg to detennination of age and determine the age of fhe petitioner after holdiag such enquiry as may be pennissible under fhe law. The enquny may be completed and reprcsentation may be decided wifhia a reasonable tiine. 7. Wifh fhe aforesaid direction, petition staads finaUy disposed off. Sd/- ManindraMohanShrivastova Judge