- (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 15.5.2009 passed by the learned jingle Judge in W.P.(S) No. 156 of 2008, by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant herein was dismissed. Consequently the plea of the petitioner-appellant challenging the order of his superannuation from the services of the respondent-company w.e.f. 29.2.2008 was upheld, which the petitioner-appellant had challenged on the ground that his date of birth had illegally and wrongly not been rectified by the respondent-Company in response to his application which he had filed for correction of his date of birth.
(2.) The impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge id meticulous in nature wherein it has been recorded that the petitioner-appellant had entered into the services of the respondent-Company as Face Worker on 6.3.1973. At the time of his appointment, the petitioner had duly affixed his signature on the form indicating that his age was 25 years and thereafter he was sent for medical examination for assessment of his age, after which his age was assessed as 25 years and the same was confirmed. The petitioner thereafter continued in the services of the respondent-Company but in the year 1998 the concerned department of the respondent-Company informed the appellant that as per entry in his service record, his date of birth was recorded as 27.2.1948 and in case he had any objection and he wanted the entry to be corrected, then he should produce the relevant document for correction, if any. This gave a cause to the petitioner-appellant to file a protest letter in the year 1998 stating that his actual date of birth indicated as per the marksheet, which was issued to him when he was declared unsuccessful in a matriculation examination, is 4.7.1952 and not 27.2.1948. The respondents however refused to rectify the date of birth of the petitioner-appellant and consequently an order of superannuation was passed on 31.8.2007, indicating that the petitioner was to superannuate from service w.e.f. 29.2.2008.
(3.) The petitioner-appellant filed a writ petition before the Single Bench bearing W.P.(S) No. 156 of 2008, assailing the order of his superannuation but the learned Single Judge, for the detailed reasons recorded in the impugned judgment and order, was pleased to dismiss the writ petition against which this appeal has been preferred.;