TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Memo dated 16.6.1999 issued by the Electrical Superintending Engineer Deoghar (The respondent No. 2) as contained at Annexure -2 whereby and whereunder the petitioner was informed that as per the direction of the Secretary of the Bihar State Electricity Board made by letter dated 3.6.1999, the petitioner was directed to appear before the Medical Board for ascertaining his age. For that purpose, the petitioner was further directed to carry with him photographs etc.
(2.) THE petitioner has also prayed for quashing the letter dated 9.12.1999 as contained at Annexure 2/1 issued by the Executive Engineer, Godda (respondent No. 3) directing the petitioner to present himself before the Medical Board at Patna on 18.12.1999 between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. The petitioner has also made a prayer for quashing the report dated 3.2.2000 issued by the Medical Board of B.S.E.B. (respondent No. 4) as contained at Annexure 3 whereby and whereunder it was reported that the petitioner was 55 -56 years (55 years) as on 3.2.2000 on the basis of a test conducted after forensic examination, orthopaedic examination and radiological examination including observations of ossification changes in the bones and the joints. According to the petitioner he was appointed in the services of the Bihar State Electricity Board and at the time of his appointment he was a Junior Lineman and his date of birth was entered in the Service B iok showing it to be 17.3.1946. A photocopy of the relevant extract of the Service Book has been marked Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition. The petitioner has stated that as per the aforementioned entry made in the Service Book he would be reaching the age of 60 on 17.3.2006 and therefore he should be allowed to continue till that date i.e. 17.3.2006 and not upto 20.2.2005 as stated by the respondents in their counter affidavit at para 10 thereof.
(3.) THE petitioner has complained that it was only in the year 1999 that the Board for the first time took a decision to compel some of its employees including the petitioner to go for medical examination for re -assessment of their age. Pursuant to the aforementioned decision, the Respondents issued the impugned Annexures -2 and 2/1 whereafter his date of birth was determined illegally by Annexure 3 by the Medical Board as "54 -56 (55) years as on 3.2.2000".;