Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) IN this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the letter dated 24.2.2005 whereby and whereunder the petitioner had been intimated that he is to superannuate on 31.7.2005. The averments made in the writ application goes to show that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Electrician on 31.1.1973 and that at the time of entering into service the age of the petitioner was entered in the statutory form B register as 25 years in 1976 which in effect means that the date of birth of the petitioner was construed as 1.7.1950. A letter dated 24.2.2005 was issued by the respondent No. 5 wherein it was intimated that the petitioner is to superannuate on and from 31.7.2005 on account of his reaching of age of 60 years on 15.7.2005. Representation was submitted by the petitioner to the authorities claiming the date of birth as 1.7.1950 but since the respondents did not take pains in correcting the date of birth of the petitioner, the present writ application has been filed.
(2.) HEARD Mr. B.K. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents. Mr. B.K. Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in the statutory form B register the date of birth of the petitioner recorded at the time of entering into the service was 1.7.1950 but subsequently on the basis of an imaginary date of birth the petitioner has been made to retire on and from 31.7.2005. It has further been submitted that on being served with a copy of superannuation notice the petitioner has represented the authorities about the discrepancies in his date of birth and although his claim was initially being considered in right earnest but ultimately the respondents could not come to a conclusion as regards the dispute raised by the petitioner. It has further been submitted that records which are being maintained by the respondents have thrown up a dispute with respect to the discrepancies. in the date of birth of the petitioner. In such circumstance, therefore, it has been submitted that the statutory form B register being the focal point to conclusively prove that the date of birth of the petitioner is 1.7.1950 the respondents cannot be allowed to dither on the same and on consideration of such date of birth the petitioner is eligible to be paid all consequential benefits including the salary for the period of five years from his date of retirement i.e. 31.7.2005 to his actual date of superannuation considering his date of birth to be 1.7.1950.
(3.) MR . A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has submitted that although the petitioner has produced a photocopy of the form B register maintained at Madhuban Colliery but the petitioner has failed to produce or bring on record the form B register maintained in his initial place of posting which is Muraidih Colliery. It has further been submitted that the form B which has been annexed to the writ application does reveal interpolation in the date of birth column of the petitioner which creates a doubt on the veracity or otherwise with respect to the claim of the petitioner with respect to his date of birth to be treated 1.7.1950.;