M.L. Singhal, J. - (1.) MEHAR Chand joined Pepsu Road Transport Corporation as driver on 4.5.1972. As per him, he was born on 15.8.1940 and he should have retired on 31.8.1998 on attaining the age of superannuation. To his surprise, General Manager, Pepsu Road Transport Corporation passed order bearing No. 435/PRTC/E dated 31.7.1993 retiring him from service with effect from 30.4.1988. Mehar Chand challenged order No. 435/PRTC/E dated 31.7.1993 retiring him from service with effect from 30.4.1988 by means of suit for declaration. It was alleged in the plaint that he could not be retired from service with effect from 30.4.1988 as retirement with effect from back date is illegal, inoperative honest, malafide against the service rules and the principles of natural justice. He prayed that his retirement with effect from 30.4.88 brought about by order No. 435/PRTC/E dated 31.7.1993 should be adjudged inoperative, honest, malafide, discriminatory and he shall be deemed to be in service entitled to continue till 31.8.1998. It was alleged in the plaint that he was born on 15.8.1940 and 15.8.1940 was correctly recorded as the date of birth in the service record. Assumption of the department that his date of birth was 19.4.1930 was wrong, it was further alleged in the plaint that he was given no opportunity of being heard before the order No. 435/PRTC/E dated 31.7.1993 was passed retiring him from service with effect from 30.4.1988.
(2.) DEFENDANT PRTC contested the suit of the plaintiff urging that the plaintiff gave 19.4.1930 as the date of his birth in the application for appointment to the post of driver but later on the gave incorrect affidavit that his date of birth was 15.8.1940. He got driving licence No. 11896 on 23.2.1951. If he had been born on 15.8.1940, he could not have been given the driving licence. If he was born on 15.8.1940, he would be 9 -1/2 years old as on 23.2.1951. Driving licence could not be given to a child aged 9 -1/2 years. He was retired vide the impugned order with effect from 30.4.88 as he was born on 19.4.1930 which was his correct date of birth. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed : - 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to declaration prayed for ? OPP 2. Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action and locus standi to file the present suit ? OPD 3. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is liable to be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC ? OPD
(3.) WHETHER the plaintiff is estopped from his act and conduct from filing the present suit ? OPD 4 -A. Whether the civil court has no jurisdiction to try the suit which is impliedly barred ? OPD;