mwwk v a? /m%/ SingEa Bench IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTSIGARH AT BILASPUR w.P (S). No 5323 5‘ 12006 PETITIONER : Gyan Singh s/o Nanku, age 46 years,/ Occupation-Service, Electric Fitter, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. North Chirmiri Colliery, Deva Incline r/o’ Doman Hill 2O Number, P .S. Chirmiri, District Koria, C.G. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.” Through the Chairman cum Managing Director, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, C.G. 2. General Manager, North Chirmiri Colliery, G.M. Complex, Malviya Nagar, P.S, Podi Baikunthpur, District Koria, C.G. Chief Personnel Manager, North Chirmiri Area, G.M. Complex, Malviya Nagar, P.S. Podi Baikunthpur, District Koria, C.G. 4. Mines Superintendent, North Chirmiri Colliery, (Gelhapanai) Manendragarh, District Koria, C.G. WRIT PETlTlON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THF‘ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. " / HIGH CGURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT B§LASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNiHOTRl, J. WRIT PETI‘fiON {SJ NO.5287 GF 20136 Peiitioner : Gyan Singh VerSUS South Eastern Caaifieids Ltd. and others Respondents the petitioner is empioyed as Electric Fitter in the Coaltietds - respondent No.1. According to the petitioner, the actua! date of birth of the petitioner is 2-7-1960. By mistake. his date of birth has been recorded as 11-5-1 950. According to teamed counse! for the petitioner, applications have been made to the respondents to refer the matter to the Age Determination Commtttee for determination of the petitioner’s actual date of birth. Despite several appilcationstrepresentatlons, nothing has been done so far. 2. Mr. P.S.Koshy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submits that if the matter has not been considered by the Age Determination Committee in the given facts as stated by Present : Mr. A.K.Prasad, counsei for the petitioner. Mr. P.S.Koshy, counsel for the respondents. GREER (Passed on 4“ of-Ogtober, 2008) Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that learned counsel for the petitioner, the same may be referred to the Age Determination Committee. 3. in View of the aforementioned submissions of the parties, t’ne writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the matter may be considered by the Age Determination Committee, if the same has not been done eariier. No order as to costs. Certified copy as per ruies. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri i i Judge i {