This appeal is directed against the decision dated 14-7-1982 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No. 6, Rawalpindi, whereby the grievance petition of the appellant for his re-instatement in service was dismissed.
2. The appellant. Was retired with effect from 9-2-1982 on account of completing the age of superannuation of 60 years. The appellant claims that his date of birth is 20-2-1929 but according to his service record it is 10-2-1922. The appellant produced in evidence photostat copy of his pass- -port Exh. P-3 and medical certificate Exh. P-4. Exh. P-3 is not the photo copy of complete passport with the result that the portion in which date of issue is given is missing. Only the appellant knows the reasons for which he had not brought on the record complete copy of the passport. The presumption is that if he had produced complete copy it would not have helped him. Moreover while issuing a passport the date of birth is given in it which has been pro--vided by the person applying for it and the date of-birth given by him is not disputed. The copy of the passport, therefore, has no sufficient evidentiary value for the purpose of age. The medical certificate is not helpful to the appellant firstly because it suggests that the age given in it is according to the one disclosed by him and secondly the Medical Superintendent gave the age only on account of general appearance. No X-rays of bones were taken. Moreover, such a certificate is always based upon an opinion and not on accurate age. The appellant got this medical certificate on 22-11-1981 after notice of retirement was issued to him on 24-3-1979 and after he was asked vide letter dated 2-11-1979 Exh. P-6 to produce original passport, iden--tity card, birth certificate and school leaving certificate. For this reason his medical certificate Exh. P-4 cannot be relied upon. On the other hand his service record was maintained at the time the appellant joined service when no dispute regarding his retirement was existing. The service record bears the signatures and thumb impressions of the appellant. Its authenticity, therefore, is beyond any shadow of doubt. The respondent has rightly regarded his date of birth as 10-2-1922 and rightly retired him with effect from 9-2-1982. The grievance petition therefore was rightly dismissed.
3. As upshot of the discussion made above, I do not find any force in the appeal and dismiss it in limine.