BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON, J. - (1.) CLAIMING his date of birth as 1.1.1941, the petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 18.10.1996 (Annexure P -4) whereby, taking date of birth of the petitioner to be 28.2.1929, it was held that the retiral dues such as gratuity, leave encashment etc. shall not be admissible to the petitioner beyond 28.2.1989 and only his share of contribution towards EPF/CPF from 1.3.1989 to the actual date of retirement along with interest on this portion, shall be paid to him. The petitioner has sought all these retiral benefits till the actual date of his service i.e., 8.11.1995 which had gone beyond the date of his retirement i.e. 28.2.1989.
(2.) THIS is the second round of litigation between the parties. In the first round of litigation, deciding CWP No.8725 of 1996 filed by the petitioner, the following order (Annexure P -3) was passed on 12.9.1996 by a Division Bench of this Court: - "There was a dispute regarding the date of birth of the petitioner. It is not disputed that petitioner has a brother by the name of Mehar Chand who is younger to him. As per annexure P9, when matter was being enquired, it was found on the basis of service record of Mehar Chand, brother of the petitioner, that his date of birth is November 28, 1929 and he stood retired from service on November 30, 1987. Since Mehar Chand was younger to the petitioner, even if only one year is subtracted from the date of birth of Mehar Chand, the petitioner's birth would be somewhere in the year 1928. Consequently, we do not find any case for interference under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that even if the date of birth as now determined is taken into consideration, the petitioner retires from service about ten months back but no retiral benefits have been released to him. We direct the respondents to release all the retiral benefits to the petitioner within a period of two months from today. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly." In terms of this order, controversy with regard to date of birth of the petitioner is no more alive for adjudication. Concededly, Mehar Chand brother of the petitioner who was also in the employment of the respondents, having been born on November 28, 1929, had superannuated on November 30, 1987 after attaining the age of 58 years. Since Mehar Chand was younger brother of the petitioner, subtracting one year from the date of birth of his brother Mehar Chand, the petitioner's date of birth was taken to be somewhere in the year 1928.
(3.) IN terms of the impugned order Annexure P -3, retiral benefits of the petitioner were to be calculated and released within two months therefrom. Order of 18.10.1996 (Annexure P -4), passed by the competent authority in compliance with order dated 12.9.1996 of this Court, is as under: - "7. .... According to the terms and conditions stipulated in the above office order, the age of retirement of a regular employees Class III was fixed as 58 years as per Punjab CSR Rules but according to his date of birth as 28.2.1929 Shri Brahm Dutt, Loco Driver had already crossed the above age of superannuation of 58 years. He was therefore not entitled to become regular. The orders for bringing Shri Brahm Dutt, Loco Driver on regular cadre are, therefore, withdrawn and he is treated as work -charged employee and is retired from service with effect from 28.2.1989 on attaining the age of superannuation of 60 years as in the case of work - charged employees. 8. The period of overstay in service from 1.3.1989 to 8.11.1995 i.e. after attaining the age of superannuation of Shri Brahm Dutt, Loco Driver is treated as "Dies - Non" for all intents and purposes except for the purpose of wages already paid for the work done by him. All other retiral dues such as Gratuity, leave encashment, EPF, CPF and EBA etc. shall not be admissible for the period beyond 28.2.89 and only his share of contribution towards EPF/CPF from 1.3.89 to the actual date of retirement along with interest on this portion shall be paid to him." ;