' The decision, asked 3rd March, 1984 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Punjab Labour Court No, 3, Lahore at Ferozewala has been challenged, whereby Muhammad Ismail (hereinafter to be called as the respondent) was directed to be reinstated in service without back benefits. The respondent has in his appeal claimed back benefits, whereas Ravi Engineering Limited (hereinafter to be described as the appellant) has challenged the direction of re-instatement. Since both the appeals arise from the same decision, they are being disposed of together through this single judgment.
2. The facts are that on the basis of a medical certificate Exh. R. 1 of 1973 the respondent was retired at the age of 60 years. The learned lower Court has rightly not relied upon this certificate but the observations made there may be a difference of five years on either side cannot be upheld. Only the doctor being expert can say about the age. Exh. R. I does not show on which basis the doctor opined that the age of the respondent was at that time 50 years. A certificate about age issued on the basis of X-Rays report has evidentiary value and not thecertificate issued on the basis of general appearance, since on one day the respondent has to retire, so it is not necessary to determine the date of, his retirement.
As a result the appeal of the appellant is accepted partly recording the case jurisdiction, the appellant is directed to get the respondent re-examined from some Government Hospital for age which will be determined on the basis of X-Ray reports. Till it is done, the respondent will remain in service. The respondent is not entitled to back benefits, since not without some evidence but on the basis of a medical certificate he was retired. So the appeal of the respondent is dismissed.