RAJESH SHANKAR,J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 31st July, 2009 passed by the Respondent No.2, whereby the Government of India refused to refer the industrial dispute to the appropriate Labour Court for adjudication. It has further been prayed for commanding upon the Respondent No.3 to recompute the entire benefits, including retiral benefits, by treating the petitioner's date of birth as 18th September, 1949 in place of 1st January, 1947.
(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Chargeman, West Modidih Colliery on 1st January, 1973 and at the time of appointment, his date of birth was recorded as 18th September, 1949 in the initial Form-B Register as per the matriculation certificate issued by the Bihar School Examination Board. After the appointment, the Management issued identity card to the petitioner, showing his date of birth as 18th September, 1949. On 17th June, 1987 the Management provided service excerpts to the petitioner with instruction that if he had any objection regarding any particular recorded therein, he was supposed to note his objection. The petitioner came to know that his date of birth was wrongly recorded in the service excerpts as 1st January, 1947 and as such he filed an objection, stating that his date of birth is 18th September, 1949. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Clerk and identity card was also issued to the petitioner, showing his date of birth as 18th September, 1949. Surprisingly, on 14th July, 2006, the Management served superannuation letter to the petitioner, intimating that he would be retiring from service with effect from 1st January, 2007 by treating his date of birth as 1st January, 1947. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation on 25th August, 2006 before the Project Officer, West Modidih Colliery, stating therein that since his date of birth is 18th September, 1949 as per Form-B, Register No.85 and the identity cards, he would attain the age of sixty years only on 18th September, 2009. Since no order was passed on the said representation, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Dhanbad and on failure of conciliation, the dispute was sent to the appropriate Government for referring the dispute for adjudication. However, the Government of India through the Ministry of Labour vide impugned letter dated 31st July, 2009 refused to refer the dispute, holding, inter alia, that the dispute has been raised at the fag end of service and the claim has not been substantiated by any documentary evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned letter dated 31st July, 2009, refusing to refer the industrial dispute for adjudication, is illegal, as the appropriate Government, while taking decision to refer the dispute under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') cannot decide the case on merit, rather the dispute is required to be adjudicated by the industrial tribunal on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties to the dispute.
(3.) In support of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner puts reliance on the judgments rendered in the cases of Dhanbad Colliery Karamchari Sangh v. Union of India and Ors., reported in (1991) Supp. (2) SCC 10, and Telco Convoy Drivers Mazdoor Sangh and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Ors., reported in AIR 1989 SC 1565.;