Prakash Tatia, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner claims that his correct date of birth is 1.4.1956 whereas the respondent Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd. found that the correct date of birth is 3.1.1950. Treating that date of birth of the petitioner, the respondent sought to retire the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner then submitted SBCWP No. 11365/2009 wherein the respondent submitted that they will verify the date of birth of the petitioner again from his school record. On the basis of the said stand of the respondent, by order dated 16.12.2009, this Court permitted the respondent to verify the actual date of birth of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner's contention is right, then he may not be retired on the basis of date of birth recorded with the respondent. In pursuance of the order dated 16.12.2009, the petitioner was permitted to produce the proof in support of his date of birth, upon which the petitioner produced several documents including the certificate obtained from the school about his date of birth. The petitioner was given opportunity of hearing and the respondent verified the petitioner's school record and found that there are overwritings. The respondent after considering the petitioner's contention rejected his plea that his date of birth is 1.4.1956.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the respondent has considered the school certificate and documents of other employees and corrected their date of birth but in the case of the petitioner, the respondent has not done so. It is also submitted that the date of birth given by the petitioner is the correct date of birth.;