2026:JHHC:21738-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 39 of 2026 Dhani Ram, aged about 63 years, son of Narayan, resident of Bokaro Colliery, Sunday Bazar, PO: Sunday Bazaar, PS: Bermo, District- Bokaro. ... Appellant Versus 1. M/s. Central Coalfields Limited, a subsidiary of Coal India Limited, through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director having its registered office at Darbhanga House, Ranchi, PO: Ranchi GPO, PS: Kotwali, District-Ranchi 2. Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi, PO: Ranchi GPO, PS: Kotwali, District-Ranchi 3. Chief General Manager, B & K Area of Central Coalfields Limited, Kagali, PO: Kagali, PS: Bermo, District-Bokaro 4. Project Officer, Bokaro Colliery, Central Coalfields Limited, PO: Kagali, PS: Bermo, District-Bokaro 5. Assistant Manager (Personnel Administration), Bokaro Colliery, Central Coalfields Limited, PO: Kagali, PS: Bermo, District-Bokaro .. Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Appellant: Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondents: Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, Sr. Advocate Mr. Aniket Kumar Ojha, Advocate --------- 02/Dated: 22.07.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. I.A. No. 715 of 2026 seeks condonation of delay of 277 days in instituting this appeal. 3. The reasons set out in the I.A. are entirely unverifiable and do not explain this delay or show any sufficient cause. As such, this I.A. is liable to be dismissed. However, even if we were to take an over indulgent view and condone this delay, we find that the appellant is not entitled to any relief and there is no error whatsoever in the learned Single Judge’s order declining relief. 4. The appellant’s date of birth was recorded as 26th February, 1950 at the time of his initial appointment sometime in the year 1987. The appellant, based on this date, retired on 28.02.2010. 2026:JHHC:21738-DB 5. The record suggests that the application for correction in the date of birth was submitted after retirement. 6. As if this was not sufficient, the appellant had preferred the writ petition in which the impugned order has been made only in the year 2022 i.e. almost 12 years after he was retired from service. Such a petition, could not have been entertained and has correctly not been entertained. It is well settled that applications for correction in the date of birth cannot be made towards the fag end of the service tenure. They have to be made within some reasonable period from the date of record of such date of birth. Here, it appears that the application was made after retirement. The petition is also instituted 12 years after retirement. There is no question of grant of any relief to such an appellant. 7. For all the above reasons, we dismiss this I.A. and consequently, the accompanying appeal without any order for costs. 8. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) July 22, 2026 N.A.F.R. APK/VK Uploaded on 24. 07.2026