- (1.) Heard Learned Counsel For The Parties.
(2.) The correctness and legality of the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 4309 of 2007 dated 20th May, 2009 is assailed by the aggrieved respondent in the present appeal.
(3.) Since The Order Impugned Is Brief And Also Refers To The Case Of the parties, we reproduce it hereunder for the convenience sake. "In the instant writ petition the petitioner prays for an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing letter No. 7/207 dated 26.5.2007 whereby and whereunder the notice of superannuation has been served on the petitioner. The petitioner further prays for quashing the aforesaid impugned letter dated 26.5.2007 and further pleased to direct the concerned respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work till completion of 60 years taking into consideration the fact that the date of birth of the petitioner is 12.4.1954. The present matter relates to dispute with regard to age. The claim of the petitioner is that he born on 12.4.1954 whereas the respondent Coal company submits that as per FormB register age mentioned in 01.10.1947. The petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexure2 which is at page 22 from the service excerpts which is dated 2.8.1987 wherein the date of birth at column 6 is recorded as 1.10.47 and date of appointment is recorded as 1.10.71 however, an objection to that has also been recorded based on the matriculation certificate which has also been produced in which the date of birth is recorded as 12.4.54. The matriculation certificate is annexed at page 21. Another document which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is dated 14.1.06 which is annexed at Annexure3 issued by the Personnel Manger wherein the petitioner along with some other employees were called to go for a medical check up for determination of their age in which the Personnel Manger on behalf of the respondents admits that there was dispute with regard to the age and date of birth. As per instruction 76 which is applicable and binding on the respondents, it is well settled that the matriculation certificate is the best document which can be adhered to and relied upon and this issue has been conclusively decided by a Full Bench in (Kamta Pandey Vs. M/s B.C.C.L through ChairmancumManging Director, Dhanbad & Ors., 2007 3 JCR 681). Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie I find substance in the writ petition more so when the Management itself felt the need for a medical check up and thus it will be in the interest of justice to direct the respondents to immediately send the petitioner for a medical check up and/or get the matriculation certificate verified from Bihar School Examination Board within a period of four months and if it is found to be authentic the relief prayed for has to be granted in the light of Full Bench judgment. Let a decision in this regard be taken within a period of two months. This writ petition is accordingly allowed with the aforesaid direction.";