CWP-14507-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (108) CWP-14507-2025 Date of Decision : July 15, 2025 Baleshwar Prasad Singh .. Petitioner Versus Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-III, Faridabad and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Present: Mr. Bhisham Kumar Majoka, Advocate, for the petitioner. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL) 1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the Award dated 03.01.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Labour Court by which, it has been held that the petitioner had retired on attaining the age of superannuation by treating his date of birth as 02.04.1957 instead of 10.10.1959. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facts and evidence that came on record have not been appreciated by the Labour Court correctly hence, the Award dated 03.01.2019 (Annexure P-1) may kindly be set aside. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record with his able assistance. HARSHA RANI 2025.07.16 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-14507-2025 2 4. A bare perusal of the Award dated 03.01.2019 (Annexure P-1) would show that in total service record, the date of birth of the petitioner has been mentioned as 02.04.1957. The same has been taken into account so as to treat the petitioner as retired on attaining the age of superannuation i.e. on 21.04.2015. 5. Once, the record available with the authorities considering date of birth as 02.04.1957 has gone un-rebutted merely that the petitioner claimed that his date of birth is 10.10.1959, the same cannot be taken into account for any purpose. Only the date of birth submitted by the petitioner at the time of seeking appointment and other benefits, which is concededly 02.04.1957 is to be taken into account for all purposes hence, the Award dated 03.01.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Labour Court is in consonance with the facts and evidence brought on record. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show that the Award dated 03.01.2019 (Annexure P-1) is perverse either to the facts or the evidence on record. 7. Hence, no ground is made out for any interference by this Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. July 15, 2025 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) harsha JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No HARSHA RANI 2025.07.16 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document