' By an order dated 5-12-1992, the learned Punjab Labour Court No,7, at Gujranwala, accepted the grievance petition of Qazi Muhammad Ilyas, filed under section 25-A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, set aside the entries as regards date of birth existing in his service book and directed the appellants, respondents before the Labour Court, to correct the entries and determine his date of retirement accordingly.
2. Qazi Muhammad Ilyas joined service of WAPDA, on work-charged basis, as helper, in the year 1964. His service was regularised in the year 1965. Later he became and is presently also working as Test Assistant, at Gujranwala. His date of birth in the service record was entered as 1-12-1932.
' He obtained a medical certificate and the date was changed as 19-10-1944. Both these entries are available in his service book; and he pleads that there is good deal of ambiguity and it would not be wrong to say that the record has not correctly been maintained. He had unsuccessfully applied for correction of the record.
3. The ' Authorities' are of the view that 1-12-1932 is the date of birth, that had been recorded on initial employment of Qazi Muhammad Ilyas, on the basis of the information furnished by him.
There is, however, no proof available in that behalf. The clerk making the entries and preparing the service record might have done it, suo motu. It was similarly incorrect, as was, the subsequent entry, 19-10-1944, that was made in accordance with the age given in the medical certificate.
4. It is so well-known that on one's recruitment in Government service one is required to obtain a medical fitness certificate by paying visit to the Medical Superintendent, who may examine him personally or through a subordinate. The main object of the medical certificate is the verification about physical fitness of the new recruit/employee and the date of birth or age is stated in the said certificate only casually or as a corollary. To say that the age described on medical examination of a civil servant or an employee of a corporate body by the doctor is something final and conclusive would be an absurd thing, close to fiction and divorced from reality. Authentic entry about age or date of birth emanates from the "Janam Patri", or school leaving certificate. Entry about age, for the first time, is generally made in matriculation certificate and it is relied upon by everybody. One may not have his education up to matriculation, and may leave school earlier. The school leaving certificate, in that event, will carry the date of birth that may, however, have been entered in the school record at random. But at the same time, such an entry may also be authentic, as the elder who accompanies a lad and gets him admitted in school is supposed to know the age or date of birth of the new entrant in school, or he may state the same by guess work; but such entry is generally given credence and considered to be authentic. At pages 101, 107 and 109 of the file of the lower Court, there are available the school-leaving certificate, the character certificate, and extract from the admission and withdrawal register of the school students. The date of birth has been described as 19-1-1940, everywhere. It is not understandable as to why this entry should not be placed implicit reliance upon. The entry in the service book had not been signed by the employee and there is no proof to the effect that he had himself given his date of birth as 1-12-1932. Qazi was employed on work-charged basis on 27-11-1964 and he was made regular on 26-12-1966. His service book was prepared on 19-5-1965 and his date of birth was incorporated therein; but it was obviously a fictitious entry, which could also be described as fake. He was medically examined on 4-8-1967, when his date of birth was entered as 19-10-1944, again fictitiously. The committee constituted for verification of his age again acted in routine, with no objective approach or application of mind, although their proceedings are spread over the documents Exhs. P-6, and P-7 and P-8. Exh. P-2 is the school leaving certificate and Exh. P-1 is its attested copy. 19-1-1940 has been stated as the date of birth of Muhammad Ilyas. Pages of Service Book Exhs. P-3 and P-4 and the medical certificate Exh. P-5 all state the date of birth as 19-10-1944, which for obvious reasons has to be accorded no recognition.
5. It is also well-known that superior Courts have always treated low-paid employees of WAPDA even, to be workmen, entitled to the aid of the Labour Laws and to have recourse to the Labour Courts. They must not necessarily be considered as civil servant, amenable to the jurisdiction of the Service Tribunal. NLR 1991 Labour 84 may be referred to, in this regard. The Labour Court has the jurisdiction in the matter.
6. The learned Labour Court has referred to two conflicting entries about date of birth of Qazi Muhammad Ilyas existing in his service record, one made on his initial induction into service and the other on the basis of his medical examination. Initial entry, 1-12-1932, was recorded when Qazi was working on work charged basis and the second entry was made on the basis of his medical certificate. The learned court below has rightly observed that both these entries might have been made by the concerned official either suo motu or on the basis of the information asked for and furnished by him and he might not have really been aware of his correct date of birth, at that time.
It has also correctly been pronounced that justice cannot be denied to the employee for the reason that an entry by the Department has been made, on its own, and it really runs against the service interests of the employee. Both the entries, 1-12-1932 and 19-10-1944, were rightly observed by the learned lower Court as incorrect, having been made at random. It is to be noted that there is a difference of about 12 years in the two dates of birth, which could not be explained on any valid premises. He was made to retire prematurely on the basis of the first entry i,e, 1-12-1932, though he could very well say that the other entry, viz. 19-10-1944 be accorded recognition in ultimate analysis. By all means, a conclusive reliance could be placed on the third entry, i,e, 19-1-1940, which had existence in more authentic and dependable document, namely, the school leaving certificate. Following the rule of prudence, as also the rule of justice, the learned lower Court, in my considered view, has given rightful recognition to the 3rd entry, as regards the date of birth of Qazi Muhammad Ilyas, the employee, the same being 19-1-1940. An important witness, who is the in charge of the record, Muhammad Ashfaq, S.S.T., has also deposed in that behalf. When, therefore, the learned Labour Court says that the only correct and authentic entry as regards Qazi Muhammad Ilyas date of birth is 19-1-1940, it cannot be taken exception to. I would endorse the findings of the lower Court and would dismiss the appeal, being without any merit. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. In all matters, respecting service of Qazi Muhammad Ilyas, including his retirement, 19-1-1940 is the date of birth that shall be accorded due recognition.