High Court Jharkhand High Court

Md.Khalil Ansari vs Management Of M/S Bokaro Steel on 5 September, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Md.Khalil Ansari vs Management Of M/S Bokaro Steel on 5 September, 2011


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND,RANCHI.

L.P.A. No. 355 of 2010

Md. Khalil Ansari. ……………………………………………….. Appellant

Versus
Management of M/s Bokaro Steel Plant and Anr.. ……………….. Respondents

CORAM :- HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

For the Appellant :- Mr. B.B. Sinha, Adv.

                      For the Respondents           Mr.
                                             _______                     .

               Order No. 9                                       Dated 05th September, 2011

                                     I.A. No. 3211/2010

The delay of three days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 3211 of 2010 stands disposed of.

LPA No. 355/2010
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is an
illiterate person and for cutting and correction in his date of birth, he was asked to
sign thereafter, he signed in the correction of his date of birth, which was obtained
at the time of his appointment. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted
that the Medical Board’s Report of the appellant was not properly appreciated by the
labour court and therefore, the court has committed serious error. It is also
submitted that the Tribunal relied upon the oral evidence given by the Management
and not the evidence produced by the appellant.

We have considered the submission given by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the findings given by the labour court, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro in
award dated 29.11.2008 particularly in para- 5 of the award and the documents
produced by the Management as well as by the the appellant. It is not in dispute that
the appellant has sought for correction in his date of birth after much delay on a
flimsy ground.

We are of the considered opinion that the labour court as well as the learend
Single Judge have not committed any error both in law and facts. Hence, there is no
merit in this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

(Prakash Tatia, ACJ)

(P.P.Bhatt, J)
SD/- Anu/-