Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23489 (CHH)

VEDBHUSHAN GAUTAM v. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER

WPS/944/2020 · 2026-06-28

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:26273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 944 of 2020 1 - Vedbhushan Gautam, S/o. Shri Kaluram Gautam, Aged About 49 Years, Occupation Electrician N.I.S. No. 24427445, R/o. Ward No. 06 Railway Colony Dhanpuri, District Shahdol, Madhya Pradesh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfield Limited, Office Reference Seepat Road Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - General Manager (Personnel) South Eastern Coalfield Limited, Shagpur Ara S.E.C.L, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deputy Manager Personnel, Budhar And Sharda Sub Area, South Eastern Coalfield Limited Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Priyanshu Gupta, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ankit Bhoi, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande, Advocate (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.06.29 14:55:18 +0530 2 Order on Board 29.06.2026 1. The dispute in the present writ petition pertains to the age of the petitioner as the petitioner was employed in the SECL. 2. Mr. Prinyanshu Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner’s date of birth has been wrongly held to be 01.07.1960 whereas his actual date of birth is 07.07.1971. 3. Since the dispute is with regard to age of the petitioner, therefore, it is appropriate to refer the matter to the Age Determination Committee constituted under Implementation Instruction No.76. Accordingly, the matter is referred to the Age Determination Committee and the said Committee is directed to determine the correct date of birth of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the Committee shall decide the matter independently on the basis of material available on record. 4. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok