THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.8784 of 2002 Dated: 01.03.2006 Between: Lanka Ramulu, S/o Chinna Patrudu, Resident of M.I.G-1/397, P.M. Palem, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam – 41. ..... PETITIONER AND The Labour Officer, Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool, 1st Floor, Old T.M. Office Building, Opp. Port Main Gate, Visakhapatnam – 35 and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.8784 of 2002 Order: Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not taking into consideration his date of birth as 01.05.1947 for the purpose of reckoning his date of retirement and issuing the impugned order dated 20.03.2002 retiring him from service from 01.05.2002 i.e., five years earlier than his attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The petitioner states that as per the record sheet given by the Head Master, P.S. Elementary School, Ayyannapalem, Visakhapatnam, his date of birth is 01.05.1947 and the same date of birth is also mentioned in the identity card given to him by the Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool. While so, respondent No.1-Labour Officer issued the impugned order dated 20.03.2002 removing him from the rolls with effect from 01.05.2002 on the ground that he will attain the age of superannuation by 01.05.2002. The grievance of the petitioner is that since his date of birth is 01.05.1947 he is having another 5 years to attain the age of superannuation i.e., up to 01.05.2007, but respondent No.1-Labour Officer, without considering the said fact and without giving any prior notice to him, passed the impugned order retiring him from service five years earlier than his attaining the age of superannuation, which is illegal and arbitrarily. But, a perusal of the counter averments clearly indicates that as the petitioner did not produce any school certificate in proof of his date of birth at the time of his joining into service, his age was assessed by the Medical Officer of Visakhapatnam Dock Labour Board as 27 years as on 01.05.1969, and based on the said date of birth, the impugned order was passed. The petitioner, having kept quiet for all these years, cannot contend at this belated stage that his date of birth is 01.05.1947. Further, the contention of the petitioner is that in the identity card issued by the Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool, his correct date of birth was mentioned as 01.05.1947 and according to that he is having another five years to attain the age of superannuation. Since the said identity card was issued by a Private Workers Pool and not by respondent No.1-Port Trust, no relevance can be attached thereto. The petitioner failed to prove that his date of birth is 01.05.1947. In the circumstances, I see no irregularity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. There is no merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 01.03.2006 Nsr/Ksr