IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5699 of 2008 Ayodhya Prasad Singh son of Late Adbhut Nath Singh, resident of village nand p.o.Rampur Khoraum, via Nagra, P.S.Marhaura, District- Saran,Chapra. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Bihar through the Department of Cooperative, Government, Patna. 2. The Registrar of the Cooperative Society, Bihar ,Patna. 3. The National Textile Corporation through its Chairman, Patna. 4. The Administrator, National Textile Corporation, Patna. 5.The Bihar Cooperative Weaver Spinning Mills, Mokamah through its Administrator. 6. The Administrator, Bihar Cooperative Weaver Spinning Mills, Mokamah. 7. The Regional Commissioner of Provident Fund, R. Block,Patna. ………….Respondents. 2 01.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order dated 10.12.2006 passed by Manager (Administration) of the National Textile Corporation, by which it has been held that as per the record of the Mill, the petitioner shall be attaining the age of 58 years on 02.02.1997 and accordingly he shall superannuate w.e.f. from 3.2.1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the order on various grounds including the fact that his date of birth is 03.2.1945 according to his horoscope as well as transfer certificate dated 08.1.1967. He also draws the attention of this Court to Annexure-5 of the writ petition, which is the declaration and nomination form under Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952. From the entry of the date of birth, he points out that the year mentioned is 1939 but in the third digit i.e. ‘3’, there appears to be overwriting and the digits ‘9’, are written in different ways. On that basis, he submits that the entry is incorrect and cannot be the basis of determination of the date of birth of the petitioner. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and going through 2 the records, this Court feels that the petitioner has put his signature on the said declaration and nomination form, and thus cannot say one year prior to his retirement that the same is wrong with regard to the year of his birth and it was an interpolation made later on. Further, this Court feels that for such type of dispute with regard to date of birth, the present forum i.e., the writ proceeding is not appropriate since while having to adjudicate the matter the Court will necessarily have to give a finding with regard to what actually should be taken in law as the correct date of birth of the petitioner. For this various contemporaneous documents and other evidences brought by the parties have to be looked into and also findings given on such evidence. This Court is not inclined to go into all those formal procedures and finds that the appropriate forum is only a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. The petitioner shall have full opportunity before the said Civil Court where he can prove that his actual date of birth is 03.2.1945 and not 3.2.1939 , which has been relied upon by the authority of the National Textile Corporation while making him superannuate. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court does not find any merit in the writ application and the same is dismissed. However, dismissal of this writ petition shall not prejudice in any way the proceedings, which the petitioner may institute before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction, if so advised, for determination of his date of birth. Once the same is done, consequences would automatically follow from the said declaration. Sudha ( Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. )