Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.37 seconds)

M/S. Bharat Coking Coal Lmited vs Shiv Nath Roy on 29 June, 2022

"8. In the above background it is to be noticed as to whether the consideration as made by the High Court is justified. The learned counsel for the respondent with specific reference to para 10 in the order [Shyam Kishore Singh v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine Jhar 3061] of the learned Single Judge referred to the aspect wherein the learned Single Judge has taken note of the representation made by the respondent in the year 2009 and the verification that was secured by the appellants from the Bihar School Examination Board. Though such reference is made, in our opinion, the same was not appropriate in the present facts when three decades had elapsed from the date of employment. The position is well established that if a particular date of birth is entered in the service register, a change sought cannot be entertained at the fag end of service after accepting the same to be correct during entire service. In the instant facts the position is that the respondent entered service on 1-3-1982. The date of birth entered as 4-3-1950 has remained on record from the said date. The requirement to submit the nomination form indicating the particulars of the family and the nominee was complied with and it was submitted by the respondent on 25-5-1998. In the said nomination form the date of birth of the employee was required to be mentioned, wherein the respondent in his own handwriting has indicated the date of birth as 4-3- 1950. Apart from that fact, the learned Additional Solicitor General would also point out that since there was a change in the method of maintaining the service register, all the employees were provided an opportunity to verify and seek for change in the service record in the year 1987. At that stage also the respondent did not seek for any change. Therefore, in that circumstance, when the opportunity available at the first instance in 1987 had not been availed and thereafter on 25-5-1998 when the respondent himself in the Provident Fund nomination form had indicated the date of birth as 4-3-1950 which corresponds to the date of birth entered in the service register as on the date of commencement of the employment, merely because a verification was made from the Bihar School Examination Board and even if it was confirmed that the date of birth was 20-1-1955 such change at that stage was not permissible.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - A K Choudhary - Full Document

The Thiruverkadu Municipality vs K.Obaiah on 21 September, 2021

14. Hence, the order dated 13-10-2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Shyam Kishore Singh v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. [Shyam Kishore Singh v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine Jhar 3061] and the order dated 19-2-2019 passed by the Division Bench in Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v. Shyam Kishore Singh [Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v. Shyam Kishore Singh, 2019 SCC OnLine Jhar 2412] are not sustainable.

Smt. Sita Devi Aged About 60 Years W/O ... vs Coal India Limited on 23 February, 2024

"8. In the above background it is to be noticed as to whether the consideration as made by the High Court is justified. The learned counsel for the respondent with specific reference to para 10 in the order [Shyam Kishore Singh v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine Jhar 3061] of the learned Single Judge referred to the aspect wherein the learned Single Judge has taken note of the representation made by the respondent in the year 2009 and the verification that was secured by the appellants from the Bihar School Examination Board. Though such reference is made, in our opinion, the same was not appropriate in the present facts when three decades had elapsed from the date of employment. The position is well established that if a particular date of birth is entered in the service register, a change sought cannot be entertained at the fag end of service after accepting the same to be correct during entire 3 service. In the instant facts the position is that the respondent entered service on 1-3-1982. The date of birth entered as 4-3-1950 has remained on record from the said date. The requirement to submit the nomination form indicating the particulars of the family and the nominee was complied with and it was submitted by the respondent on 25-5-1998. In the said nomination form the date of birth of the employee was required to be mentioned, wherein the respondent in his own handwriting has indicated the date of birth as 4-3-1950. Apart from that fact, the learned Additional Solicitor General would also point out that since there was a change in the method of maintaining the service register, all the employees were provided an opportunity to verify and seek for change in the service record in the year 1987. At that stage also the respondent did not seek for any change. Therefore, in that circumstance, when the opportunity available at the first instance in 1987 had not been availed and thereafter on 25-5-1998 when the respondent himself in the Provident Fund nomination form had indicated the date of birth as 4-3-1950 which corresponds to the date of birth entered in the service register as on the date of commencement of the employment, merely because a verification was made from the Bihar School Examination Board and even if it was confirmed that the date of birth was 20-1-1955 such change at that stage was not permissible.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - A R Choudhary - Full Document

WA/384/2017 on 8 February, 2021

8. In the above background it is to be noticed as to whether the consideration as made by the High Court is justified. The learned counsel for the respondent with specific reference to para 10 in the order [Shyam Kishore Singh v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine Jhar 3061] of the learned Single Judge referred to the aspect wherein the learned Single Judge has taken note of the representation made by the respondent in the year 2009 and the verification that was secured by the appellants from the Bihar School Examination Board. Though such reference is made, in our opinion, the same was not appropriate in the present facts when three decades had elapsed from the date of employment. The position is well established that if a particular date of birth is entered in the service register, a change sought cannot be entertained at the fag end of service after accepting the same to be correct during entire service. In the instant facts the position is that the respondent entered service on 1-3-1982. The date of birth entered as 4-3-1950 has remained on record from the said date. The requirement to submit the nomination form indicating the particulars of the family and the nominee was complied with and it was submitted by the respondent on 25-5-1998. In the said nomination form the date of birth of the employee was required to be mentioned, 3 wherein the respondent in his own handwriting has indicated the date of birth as 4-3-1950.
Orissa High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Panda - Full Document
1