Judgement

MITTER, J.:- This is an appeal by special leave from an award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Rajasthan directing the reinstatement of one Bhisham Verma in the service of the appellant with full back wages.

2. The facts are as follows. The appellant is a public limited company with its registered office at Sawaimadhopur in the State of Rajasthan. It has a cement factory at the said place besides a limestone quarry at Pallodi situate at a distance of 24 Kms. from the cement factory. It has two separate sets of Standing Orders for the workmen employed in the factory and in the quarries. Both sets of Standing Orders were certified in accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. The Standing Orders applicable to the workmen employed in the factory were certified in the year 1954 while those applicable to the workmen of the quarries were certified in the year 1961. Up to April 1967 both sets of Standing Orders provided for superannuation of the workmen at the age of 55 with a stipulation for extension up to 60 years if a workman was found fit to work. On a dispute having been raised for the raising of the age of superannuation of the workmen at the cement factory, a settlement was arrived at between the appellant and the respondent (a registered trade union of the employees) on 16th December 1966 whereby it was agreed that Standing Order No. 21 applicable to the cement factory be amended by raising the age of superannuation from 55 to 58 years without making any provision for further extension. A joint application following upon the agreement was moved by the appellant and the respondent for modifying the Standing Orders No. 21 with respect to the age of superannuation which was accordingly done. Nothing was however done with regard to the age of superannuation of the employees at the quarry, the relevant clause in the Standing Orders remaining unaltered.

3. On April 3, 1968 the appellant intimated the said Bhisham Verma, incline driver at the quarry, that he "had exceeded the age of retirement on 3-4-1968" and as such he was given "notice of retirement in accordance with Clause 21 of the Standing Orders of the quarries with effect from the close of work on 2-5-1968". On April 30, 1968 the said workman wrote to the appellant that although according to the service file he had completed the age of 55 years as indicated, his proper age according to his horoscope was about 50 years and his service record should be amended accordingly. The appellants reply to the above dated July 9, 1968 was to the effect that his case had been re examined and that his retirement, as already intimated on 3-4-1968 would stand. The Union took up the cause of the worker and addressed a letter on July 13, 1968 to the Regional Labour Commissioner requesting that arrangements may be made to put the worker back to work and take proper legal proceedings. On behalf of the workman it was represented that he had been working in the company since October 11, 1957, that the Personnel Manager of the quarry had given orders dismissing him from service on April 3, 1968 and that in spite of objections made by the workman that there was a mistake in the papers of the company regard to his age which was 50 as supported by his horoscope and doctor s certificate, the action of the quarry manager was illegal and contrary to service contract. The record does not show what if any other steps were taken by the parties when the Central Government made an order of reference under Section 10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act reading:

"Whether the action of the management of the Jaipur Udyog Limited, P. O. Phallodi quarry, Sawaimadhopur in terminating the services of Bhisham Verma, incline driver, with effect from 9th July 1968, on grounds of superannuation was legal and justified? If not, to what relief is he entitled?"

4. Before the Tribunal, the respondent Union filed a statement of claim wherein after recitin