R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) IN this writ application the petitioner prays for quashing the memo dated 4.6.1999 (Annexure -A), whereby it has been communicated that the Central Government has refused to refer the dispute for adjudication after consideration in terms of Section 12 (5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) THE petitioner by a communication dated 16.10.1998 made to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) sought to raise an industrial dispute regarding one Shri Raj Kumar Dhari on the grounds that, the actual date of birth of the workman is 5.10.1953, as per the 'family horoscope '; that the workman has been requesting the management since a very long time for the correction of his date of birth which has been mentioned wrongly as 32 years in the service excerpt; that the management neither made any correction nor referred him to the Apex Medical Board for the assessment of his age. The management in its communication dated 23.12.1998 made to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C), Dhanbad, inter alia, contended that the date of birth/age of the workman is recorded as 32 years as on 17.10.1971 in statutory form 'B ' register of the colliery, and that in the year 1987 service excerpt containing the date of birth etc. were issued to all employees of the company including the workman Shri Raj Kumar Dhari, inviting objections, if any, but he did not make any objection about entries rather he put his LTI as a token of acceptance and returned the same to the management, and that there is no variation in the date of birth of the workman recorded in different records of the company and therefore, the question of sending him to Medical Malindo Marandi Versus State Of Bihar Board for assessment of age did not arise, and that there is no provision to accept the date of birth on the basis of 'Family Horoscope '.
(3.) THE conciliation having failed, the Assistant Labour Commissioner referred the records to the appropriate Government. The Government by its memo dated 4.6.1999 communicated its opinion formed under Section 12 (5) of the Act to the effect that the workman is in employment since 1971, and as per report there is no discrepancy in the date of birth in the service records and, therefore, there is no justification for the demand of it 'scorrection or referring the matter to the Medical Board, at this stage and that the dispute is without any basis. The transcription of the said reason is as follows : '' "Karmkar 1971 Se Karyarat Hai, Suchit Kiya Gaya Hai Ki Karmkar Ke Sewa Recardon Me Darj Janam Tareekh Me Koi Apwad Nahin Hai. Atah Is Stage Per Sudhikaran Ki Mang Athwa Chikitsa Board Bheje Jane Ki Mang Ka Koi Auchitya Nahim hai. Vivad Niradhar Hai." ;