Shahabullah vs Western Coalfields Limited and Others

Rajendra Menon, J.—Petitioner has filed this writ petition and challenges the action of the respondents in treating his date of birth as 1.7.1953 and retiring him accordingly. It is the case of the petitioner that his date of birth is 1.12.1958 and in treating the date of birth as 1.7.1953, an error has been committed by the respondents. Petitioner was appointed on 23.2.1981 as a worker in Mohan Colliery, Kanhan Area, District Chhindwara. According to the petitioner, when he joined services he had declared his date of birth as 1.12.1958, but in the service record his date of birth was incorrectly recorded. Placing reliance on a photocopy of some identity card issued by the competent authority, petitioner claims that his date of birth should be corrected. By bringing on record a school leaving certificate-Annexure P/3 and a birth certificate-Annexure P/4, petitioner claims that his date of birth is 1.12.1958 and seeks correction of his date of birth.

Respondents have filed reply and have brought on record various statutory registers namely-Form B Register, Register maintained under the Mines Rule, to say that the date of birth 1.7.1953 is entered in Annexure R/1, Service Register of the petitioner-Annexure R/2, wherein also the date of birth of the petitioner is shown as 1.7.1953. The particulars of the family of the petitioner submitted in accordance to the statutory Provident Fund Scheme i.e., the Coal Mines Provident Fund Scheme and the nomination papers where the date of birth of the petitioner is 1.7.1953, and say that the petitioner has been rightly retired on attaining the age of superannuation by treating his date of birth as 1.7.1953.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the records, it is clear that the dispute in this writ petition pertains to the date of birth of the petitioner. The question of date of birth of the petitioner is a disputed question of fact. Admittedly, petitioner was appointed on 23.2.1981. No document prior to 23.2.1981 is produced by the petitioner wherein his date of birth is recorded as 1.12.1958. It is only for the first time that petitioner has produced a school leaving certificate-Annexure P/3, said to have been issued sometime in September 2011, where his date of birth is indicated as 1.12.1958, and he is shown to be a student of Class 5th. The school leaving certificate is in a printed proforma and only the seal of an Institute is available. That apart, the other document is the birth certificate of the petitioner issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh on 12.12.2011 i.e., much after his entering into service, and this certificate is also issued on the basis of the Registrar of Birth, on 12.12.2011. These documents cannot be treated as authentic proof with regard to date of birth of the petitioner. On the contrary, the documents available on record filed by the petitioner himself-Annexure P/1, the identity card issued by the Coal Company, goes to show that the petitioner was appointed on 23.2.1981 and in this document his date of birth is shown as 1.7.1953. That apart, in Form B Register-Annexure R/1, initially the age of the petitioner is shown as 26 years at the time of appointment, thereafter an entry is made to show that his date of birth is 1.7.1953. This document is signed by the petitioner and it also contains his photograph. Similarly, in the service register filed alongwith the return, thumb impression and signature of the petitioner is also available and in this document also his date of birth is shown as 1.7.1953. The family details of the petitioner and the documents submitted by the petitioner under the statutory Provident Fund Scheme also shows his date of birth as 1.7.1953.

That being so, consistently in the documents maintained by the respondent Management, the date of birth is shown as 1.7.1953, whereas the petitioner is relying on documents which have been issued in the year 2011 i.e., more than 30 years of his entry into service. Based on these documents it is not appropriate for this Court to declare the date of birth is 1.12.1958 and grant him any relief.

The question of date of birth is a serious disputed question of fact and based on the documents as no relief can be granted, this petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy of filing a civil suit or raise an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, where the question of date of birth can be more appropriate dealt with by relying on evidence and conducting an inquiry into the factual aspects of the matter.

With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.