BHARAT COKING COAL LTD. & ORS. versus SHYAM KISHORE SINGH

BHARAT COKING COAL LTD. & ORS. versus SHYAM KISHORE SINGH

Because the respondent's date of birth 04.03.1950 was recorded in the service register from joining (1982), he repeatedly affirmed that date in subsequent official forms (including 1987 opportunity and 1998 Provident Fund Nomination), and he sought correction only in 2009 and litigated after retirement (writ in 2014), the belated correction could not be permitted; therefore the High Court orders granting correction and benefits were set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors.; Respondent: Shyam Kishore Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the High Court of Jharkhand (lpa No.115 of 2018)
Outcome
appeal allowed; impugned High Court orders set aside
Legal Topics
Date of Birth Correction, Delay and Laches, Superannuation, Writ Petition
Service Law Labour Law Administrative Law Date of Birth Correction Delay and Laches Superannuation Writ Petition

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors.

Appellant

Shyam Kishore Singh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the High Court of Jharkhand (lpa No.115 of 2018)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a change of date of birth in service records can be allowed at the fag end of service or after retirement
  2. 2 Whether verification from school records (matriculation/Bihar School Examination Board) can override long-accepted service record entries
  3. 3 Effect of delay and failure to avail earlier opportunities (1987 verification opportunity, 1998 PF nomination) on entitlement to correction

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent's date of birth 04.03.1950 was recorded in the service register from joining (1982), he repeatedly affirmed that date in subsequent official forms (including 1987 opportunity and 1998 Provident Fund Nomination), and he sought correction only in 2009 and litigated after retirement (writ in 2014), the belated correction could not be permitted; therefore the High Court orders granting correction and benefits were set aside.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; impugned High Court orders set aside

Orders

  • Impugned order of the Single Judge in WP(S) No.6172 of 2014 set aside
  • Order dated 19.02.2019 of the Division Bench in LPA No.115 of 2018 set aside