ANIRUDDHA BOSE,J. - (1.) Though this writ petition has been listed today under the heading "To Be Mentioned", the writ petition is being taken up for hearing at this stage only on consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
(2.) The writ petitioner, who was discharging his service as Home Guard, has been demobilized with effect from 2nd February, 2009 on the ground of having attained 60 years of age, questions the validity of the decision of the authorities to demobilise him. In this regard, he has annexed a copy of an Identity Card issued by the Superintendent of Police Hooghly in which against the column "date of birth" his age has been recorded as 36 years. The Identity Card has been issued on 9th August, 1999. Though no affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondents, on instruction learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had joined the service on 9th August, 1973. If his year of birth is taken as 1963 on the basis of the Identity Card, then he would have had joined the service at the age of 10 years. That would be an absurd situation and it is apparent that the Identity Card reflects wrong date of birth. The petitioner himself was present in Court and when his learned Counsel was asked to ascertain the year of his joining service, he could not give the actual year. No material has been produced disclosing the date or year of his joining the service. The age of the petitioner thus raises the factual dispute and this Court cannot proceed on the basis of his age being disclosed in the Identity Card. No material like school certificate has been annexed to the writ petition.
(3.) Under these circumstances, I do not think the Writ Court can enter into the question of adjudication of his age.;