Jetti Lachaiah v. 1. The Dlrector (PA and W)

Petition under section 15i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the proceedings Ref. No SCES/SEC/20231 1 423 dated O6t 1 2/2023 issued by the respondent no.2. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI KALLEpALLI THIRUMALA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SRI P.SRIDHAR, REp. FOR SRI P.SRI HARSHA REDOY, SC FOR SCCL The Court made the following: ORDER \---- THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA I{ARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.8613 OF 2O2+ / ORDER: This Writ Petition is frled under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief "...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature o{ Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering his representations dated 2a.O3.2O22 arrd O3.O7.2O23 ard issuing the impugned proceedings Ref. No.SCES/SEC/2O23/655 dated 10.06.2023 and Ref. No.SCES/ SEC/2O23 /1299 dated O3.t1.2O23 arrd consequential proceedings Ref. No.SCES /SECl2023/1423 dated 06.12.2023 stipulating that on attaining the age of 61 years on 10.12.2024 he has to retire on Superannuation from the services of Singareni Collieries Educational Society in the afternoon of 31.12.2024 as illegal, arbitrarlz and contrary to law and consequently to issue directions to the respondents to accept the Date of Birth as brought out and maintained by the respondents in the S.C. High School Civil List, CMPF Records and Servrce Register and consequently continue the petitioner in sen,ice till he attains his age of 61 years on Oa.O6.2O32 and thereby retire on attaining superannuation on 30.06.2032 and to pass..." 2. Heard Sri K.Thirumala Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Sridhar, learned counsel representing Sri P.Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Singareni Collieries, for the respondents. Perused the record'

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed AS Contingent (C.F.E.) on O 1. 10.1993 in respondent-Society. Further, in the Civil List 2 maintained by S.C.High Schooi, Sector-lli, 8 Incline Colony, Godavarikhani, which is a school maintained, administered and frnanced by the respondent-Society, the petitioner's date of birth is mentioned as 08.06. 197 7, therefore, his date of retirement would be 30.06.2032. However, the respondents issued impugned notice, dated 06.12.2023, stipulating that on attaining the age of 61 years on 1O.I2.2O24, the petitioner has to retire from the services on the aftern oon of 3I.12.2024. (ii) Learned counsel further submits that in the Coal Mines Provident Fund (for short ,CMPFJ Statutory Forms, the petitioner's date of birth has been certified as O8.06. 1971. Hence, this date of birth corroborates with the date of birth mentioned in the Civil List. With regard to the authenticity of date of birth, the entry made in CMpF records is deemed to be frna,l. Further, in the records maintained by the respondents also, the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as

08.06. 197.1, therefore, the petitioner shall retire from services on 30.06.2032. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be continued in service t111 30.06.2032. 3 IK,J (iii) It is further submitted that the petitioner has made representations to the respondents on 29.11.2019, 21.09.2O2O, and 2a.O3.2O22 requesting for correction of his date of birth in service records. However, the respondents uide impugned proceedings, dated 10.06.2023 and 03.11.2023, have rejected the petitioner's request for change of date of birth stating that as per TS Educational Service Rules, SSC certificate is only valid proof for change of date of birth. It is further submitted that not allowing the petitioner to continue in service until

30.06.2032 is in contradiction to the official records maintained by the respondents, which clearly specifres the petitioner's retirement date as 30.06.2032. The respondents misunderstood that the petitioner was raising dispute with regard to the age at the fag end of his services, which itself is self-contradictory. Moreover, the respondents tailed to furnish any record substantiating that the petitioner's date of birth is 1O.12.1963. Contrary to the same, as per the records available with them clearly establishes that the petitioner's date of birth is Oa.O6.l97 l and that he will retire on 30.06.2032. The entry in I 4 wp 8613 2021 CMPF records is correct and in the instant case' in the CMPF records, the petitioner's date of birth is mentioned as 08;06.1971. Hence, the petitioner shall continue in service until -:

30.06.2032. (iv) It is further submitted that The Joint Bipartite Committee for Coal Industries (JBCCI) passed Implementation Instructions No.76 to resolve the disputes with regard to the age. As per Clause C of the said instructions ' Age Determination Committee/medical Board for the existing employees will be constituted by the Management' In the case of employees whose date of birth cannot be determined in accordalce with the procedure mentioned in clauses (g) (i) (a) or (B) (i) (b), the date of birth entered in the records of the company, namely, Form 'B' register, CMP Records and Identity Cards (untampered) would be treated as final In the CMPF Statutory Forms, the petitioner's date of birth is certifred as 08.06.197 1. Therefore, learned counsel prays this Court to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service until 30.06.2032 and to retire him on 30'06'2032 on attaining the 5 wp a6ll 2024 age of superannuation. To support his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 1 145 of 2023, dated 09.O1.2O24.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner worked as Contingent Worker w.e.f. 01.06.2013 in one of the five Telugu medium schools, run by the respondent Society and in view of the poor strength of the students for the academic year 2013 14, the said schools were closed and the contingent workers, who were working in the said schools, were absorbed on the rolls of Singareni Collieries Educational Society. Further, the work of contingent worker is of temporary in nature and they are engaged depending on the work requirement due to which they are accordingly designated as 'contingent' workers as per State Government. (iil In the year 200 1 , the contingent workers (including the petitioner) filed W.P.No.24454 of 2OOl before this Court praying to regularize their services as employees of Singareni Collieries Educational Society and this Court disposed of the 6 '! said Writ Petition uide order, dated 26.12.2077 directing the - respondents to regularize their service. As such, they were absorbed into the rolls of Singareni Collieries Educational Society and posted to work in various schools w.e.f. 01.01.20 18. Prior to their regularization, as a part of the Rules, they were advised to undergo medical test and to submit their proof of age/date of birth. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted ration card. The Medical Oflicer has taken into consideration the ration card produced by the petitioner as proof of his age/date of birth and recorded his age/date of birth as 1O.12.1963 in Form-O. As the petitioner did not submit any documentary proof regarding his age f date of birth at the time of initial appointment as a Class-IV employee on 01.01.2018, the age of the petitioner was assessed by the then Medical Ofhcer as

10.12.1963 in the Form-O of Initial Medical Examination and was recorded in the statutory documents such as EPR and SAP, which cannot be tampered and are treated as authentic records of the school. Further, if an employee produces SSC certifrcate at the time of his medical examination, the same date of birth as 7 recorded in SSC certif,rcate would have been entered in Form-O during the initial medical examination by the Medical Officer' In,theabsenceofSSCcertificate,DoBrecordedbytheMedical in the Initial Medical Examination is treated as hnal' (iii) Further, as per the Rules of respondent-Society' once the age /d'ate of birth of the employee is entered in the service records, it will be authentic and fina-l' Hence' the date of birth of the petitioner recorded in the initial medical examination form by the Medical Offtcer holds good' It is further submitted that as per records, the petitioner is about to retire on 31.12.2024 and that the petitioner has raised the issue at the fag end of service with matafide intention' Further' the Form-A,FormPS-3aldFormPS-4arefrlledpersonallybythe employees and are submitted to the CMPF authorities' Since thesaidformsareselfdeclared,thosearenotstatutory documents and the date of birth reflected in the aforementioned forms should not be considered as a basis for making modifrcationstothestatutoryrecordssuchasForm.o(IME) and EPR, which are duly signed by him' The age of the i 8 Wp 8611 202.1 ..{ petitioner is recorded and signed in Form-O without raising aly objection at that time and basing on the same, his age was recorded in statutory records. As per the said records, the petitioner is about to retire on 3l .L2.2O24. Therefore, the respondents are justified in issuing impugned notice to the petitioner. Hence, learned counsel prays this Court to dismiss the Writ Petition.

5. This Court has taken note of the submissions made bv learned counsel for the respective parties

6. On perusal of the record, it is evident that the petitioner, who was working as contingent worker in respondent-Society, along with others, preferred W.P.No.24454 of 2OOl before this Court praying to regularize lheir services as employees of Singareni Collieries Educational Society and this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition uide order, dated 26.12.2077 directing the respondents therein to regularize their service. Accordingly, the petitioner's services were regulanzed in respondent- Society Further, according to the petitioner, his age /date of birth was recorded as 08.06.1977 in CMPF records. According to the 9 respondents, at the time of joining in service, the petitioner submitted ration card and duly taking into consideration the same, the Medical Offrcer recorded his age/date of birth as

10.12.1963 in Form-O. Basing on the same, in all the records of respondent-Society, the petitioner's date of birth/age was recorded as 1O.12.1963. Here, it is pertinent to note that the J.B.C.C.I. has laid down the procedure for determination/verihcation of the age of employee uide annexure- I, implementation instruction No.76, which reads as follows: B) Review/determination of date of birth in respect of existing employee: i) (a) In the case of the eisting employees Matriculation Certihcate or Higher Secondary Certihcate issued by the recognised Universities or Board or Middle Pass Certificate issued by the Board of Education and, /or Department of Public Instmction and admit cards issued by the aJoresaid Bodies should be treated as correct provided they were issued by the said Universities/Boards/Institutions prior to the date o[ employmen t . (i) (b) Similarly, Mining Sirdarship, Winding Engine or similar other statutory certificates where the Malager had to certify the date of birth will be treated as authentic. Provided that where both documents mentioned in (i) (a) and (i) (b) above are available, the date of birth recorded in (i) (a) will be treated as authentic. ii) Wherever there is no variation in records, such cases will not be reopened unless there is a very glaring and apparent wrong entry brought to the notice of the Management. The i 10 ) I l Management after being satisfied on the merits of the case will take appropriate action for correction through Determination Committee/ Medical Board. (C) Age Determination Committee/Medical Board lor the above will be constituted by the Management. In the case of employees whose date of birth cannot be determined in accordance with the procedure mentioned in (B) (i) (a) or (B) (i) (b) above, the date of birth recorded in the records of the company, namely, Form B register, CMPF Records ald Identity Cards (untampered) will be treated as finai. Provided that where there is a variation in the age recorded in the records mentioned above, the matter will be referred to the Age Determination Committee/Medical Board constituted by the Management for determination of age.

7. From the close reading of the above Rule, it is very clear that if there is variation in the age recorded in the company records i.e., Form-B register, CMPF records and identity card (untampered), the matter will be referred to the Ag. Determination Committee/Medical Board constituted by the management for determination of age. It is the contention of the petitioner that his date of birth was recorded as 08.06.197 1 in the civil list, CMPF records, Form PS-3, and Form PS-4, and the respondents averred that the said forms are self declared and that they are not statutory documents. Further, the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded in Form-O, EPR and service book as 10.12.1963. Therefore, this Court is of the considered 11 wp a6l3 2024 opinion that it is appropriate to refer the case of the petitioner to the Age Determination Committee/Medical Board for verifrcation of age of the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to refer the case of the petitioner to the Age Determination Committee/Medical Board as per implementation instruction No.76. Since the petitioner was retired from services on 31. 12.2024, during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the respondents shall tate appropriate steps in accordance with the report submitted by the Age Determination Committee/Medical Board. Miscellaneous petitions, if ary, in this Writ Petition, shal1 stands closed. There shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// SD/- LAKSHMI BABU EPUry REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

2. J,

4. t

7. The Director (PA and W), The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., and The Ptesident, The Singareni Collieries Educational Society, Qtr. No. UM-14, Writers Basthi, Kothagudem - 507 10'1, Bhadradri Kothagudem District (TS). The General Manager (Education), The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., and The Secretary, The Singareni Collieries Educational Society, Qtr. No. UM-14, Writers Basthi, Kothagudem - 507 '101, Bhadradri Kothagudem District (TS). The General Manager, The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Ramagundam Area-ll, Godavarikhani- 505 211, Peddapalli Diskict (TS). . The Head Master, The Singareni Collieries High School, Sector-lll, S lncline Colony, Ramagundarn Area-ll, Godavarikhani- 505 211, Peddapalli District (TS) One CC to SRI KALLEPALLI THIRUMALA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI P.SRI HARSHA REDDY, SC FOR SCCL [OPUC] Two CD Copies BSR pi{z,, I l I i:. HIGH COURT DATED:0710312025 \ ORDER WP.No.8613 of 2024 oa 1HE Sr4 14. a J (t. lo 1t JUil xE n o a * D TC HEo DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS M-( 2-\\S\"{