R.S.A. No. 3551 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.S.A. No. 3551 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 16, 2011 Sarwan Singh …..Appellant Vs. State of Haryana and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.P.K. Ganga, Advocate for the appellant. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Suit of the plaintiff for declaration that his date of birth is November 1, 1954 and that he did not deserve to be retired on July 31, 2001 on attaining the age of 60 years but was entitled to continue to the post of Chowkidar till the year 2014 stands dismissed by the Courts below. Counsel for the appellant has contended that the Courts below have erred in holding that the age of superannuation of plaintiff- appellant is July 31, 2001 on the basis of date of birth already exiting in service record. R.S.A. No. 3551 of 2010 [2] I have heard counsel for the appellant and gone through the judgments passed by the Courts below. The Courts below have taken into consideration all the facts reflected in the evidence and have arrived at a conclusion that the plaintiff- appellant has not been able to establish that his date of birth is November 1, 1954 as (i) the certificate relied upon by the plaintiff has been prepared subsequently after having retired; (ii) plaintiff- appellant has not examined any authority, who could be said to have prepared and issued the certificate; (iii) parents of the plaintiff have not been examined to corroborate the certificate ; and (iv) the age of the plaintiff determined by Board of Doctors during his service cannot be ignored. On the basis of the abovesaid reasons, the date of birth of the plaintiff- appellant has been held to be July 1, 1941. A concurrent finding of fact arrived at by the Courts below on appreciation of evidence does not deserve to be interfered with. Dismissed. Since the plaintiff-appellant had neither pleaded the claim for calculating the period spent by the plaintiff as daily wager for counting the same towards the service benefit, the Courts below have not considered the said plea. Counsel for the appellant has also not raised the said plea before this Court, as such it is left undecided. May 16, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE