••'.\r.^"' "^.^~A',_ l©~ rs? Petitioner HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 7357 of2007 Hetram Kewat, S/o late Panchi-am, aged about 60 years, Semor Mechaaic, Gewra Project, Soufh Eastem Coalfields Limited, Gewra, Distt. Korba. Respondents ^ ^f' VERSUS 1. South Eastem Coal Field Limited Through Chairman cum Managing Director, (Head Office) Seepat Road Bilaspur. 2. Deputy ChiefPersonnel Manager, South Eastem Coal Field Limited, Gewra Project, Distt. Korba. 3. The Personnel Manager, South Eastem Coal FieSd Limited, Gewra Projeet, Distt. Korba. QVRIT PE'rmON UNDER .'UR.riCLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUI'ION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'UeMr. SatishK. Aemhotri.J.) Present : Shri N.K. Vyas, Advocate fbr the petitioner. Sbri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate forthe respondents. ORALORDER (Passed oa 24 day ofMareh, 2009) 1. Withtheconsent ofthe parties,thematteristakenupforhearmgfinaUy. 2. The petitioner impugns fhe memo dated 27.08.2007 (Anuexure P/l) whereby he has been hrfonned that he has to retire on 31.12.2007 after attaming fhe age of superaimuation, as his date ofbirth is mentioned as 01.01.1948 in his sei-vice book. 3. The brief facts in nutshell are that, the petitioner passed higlier secondary school examination in the year 1965 in which the date of birth of the petitioner was shov?n as 01.07.1948. Thereafter, the petitioner passed I.T.I. examination in Diesel Mechanic trade ia the year 1969 and accordmg to said certificate the date of birtli of the petitioner is 01.07.1948. The petitioner was appointed as General Mazdoor, Category- I w.e.f. 01.04.1977 with the respondent company and he was regularized ^ vide order dated 09.06.1977.. Thereafier the petitioner was promoted on vanous posts. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the date ofbirth ofthe petitioner is 01.07.1948 not 01.01.1948 and he has to be retired on 30.06.2fl08. In support of his contention he subniitted his higher secondary certificate, LT.I. pass certificate and also identity card issued by the respondent company (Anaexure P/6) in which it is clearly mentioned his date ofbirth as 01.07.1948. He iurther submits that the respondent company has issued the impugned memo. dated 27.08.2007 (Aimexure P/l), ignoring implementation instruction No. 76, relating to procedure for determination/verification of age of employees as per National Wage Agreement between representative uiiion and flie Management ofSECL. Leamed counsel appearing Ibr both the parties jomtly submit.that the present case is squarely covered by the decision ofthis court iu tiie matter ofltwari Vs. South Eastem Coalfields Ltd. & Otfaers1. Accordingly, the petitioa is partly allowed in fhe saaie terms as passed in the matter ofltwari (Supra) i.e. the respondents are direct to refer tlie dispute to the Age Determination Committee to consider all the facts as stated above and pass a reasoned order with regard to fhe deten'nination of the age offhe petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably withui a period of three months from fhe date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order asto costs. Consequently, pending applications, stand disposed of. Sahu Sd/- Satish K. Agnifaotri Judge 2007 (3) CGLJ 452