SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.A. VAIDIALINGAM AND G.K. MITTER, JJ.
Dunlop India Ltd., Appellant
Versus
Their Workmen, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 1490 of 1968, D/- 10-3-1972.
Advocates appeared
Mr. G. B. Pai, Sr. Advocate (Mr. D. N. Gupta, Advocate, with him), for the Appellant; Messrs. D. L. Sen Gupta, Janardan Sharma and S. K. Nandy, Advocates for the Respondents.
Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 – Section 7 - Desires to remain in service - Age of retirement - Appellant is a Joint Stock Co. incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 - It carries on business throughout India as manufacturers and dealers of tyres, tubes for motors, trucks and tractors etc - Workman concerned one, was appointed - At that time there was no rule regarding age of superannuation - Company framed and brought into force under Section 7 of Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Standing orders relating to its staff employees - Under clause 28 of the Standing Orders a staff employee was to retire on first January next following year in which he attains 55 years of age - Whether retirement is justified – Held, court have also referred to inter-office letter which further shows that even according to appellant concerned workman is entitled to continue in service till the age of 60 years - But it is not necessary for court to refer to those decisions cited either by two - Court will only refer to decisions of this Court in Messrs - British Paints (India) Ltd. v. Its Workmen, (1966) 2 SCR 523, which relates to West Bengal region wherein this Court fixed age of retirement both for factory workmen and staff members in Company concerned at 60 years - No doubt, it is pointed out in said decision that uniform age was fixed for factory workmen also in that case because of particular nature of work the factory workmen had to do, but one thing is clear, the trend in West Bengal region is to fix age of retirement at 60 years for the clerical and subordinate staff - From this point of view the direction of Tribunal that the appellant was entitled to continue in service till 60 years is justified - Result is that the Award of Industrial Tribunal is confirmed and this appeal dismissed - Appeal dismissed.
Judgment
VAIDIALINGAM, J.:- This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the award dated February 29th, 1968 of the 5th Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, in case No. 334 of 1967, setting aside the order dated August 2, 1966 passed by the appellant directing the retirement of the concerned workman on his attaining the age of 58 years.
2. The appellant is a Joint Stock Co. incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It carries on business throughout India as manufacturers and dealers of tyres, tubes for motors, trucks and tractors etc. The workman concerned Hari Nath Bhattacharjee, was appointed in 1944. At that time there was no rule regarding the age of superannuation. On April, 26, 1955, the Company framed and brought into force under Section 7 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Standing orders relating to its staff employees. Under clause 28 of the Standing Orders a staff employee was to retire on the first January next following the year in which he attains 55 years of age. But it was also provided that if a staff employee desires to remain in service of the Company after the date when he should have been normally retired, the Managing Director had the power to extend the employee s service year by year provided the work was found to be satisfactory and the employee was certified by the Chief Medical Officer as of good health.
3. In 1956 an agreement was entered into between the appellant and its workmen represented by the Dunlop Rubber Factory Labour Union. Clause 14 of the agreement fixed the age of retirement of a staff employee s the 1st of January next following the year in which he has attained 55 years of age, Notwithstanding this agreement under which the age of retirement of a staff employee was 55 years, the appellant issued a Circular on April 20, 1960 to the effect that the management will not ask any employee to retire before attaining the age of 58 years. In this Circular after referring to the uniform age of retirement in West Bengal of employees in Government and Commercial Establishments as the age of 55 years, it is stated that the Industrial Tribunal throughout the Country have fixed the age of retirement varying from 55 years to 60 years.
4. On June 29, 1961, an agreement was entered into between the appellant and the Dunlop Rubber Factory Labour Union regarding the terms of engagement and conditions of employment of staff employees. The agreement deals with various matters. Clause 14 of this agreement provided that the staff employees shall retire at the end of the month in which they attain the age of 58 years. This clause also provides for a staff employee retiring when he is declared unfit on medical grounds. Clause 27 provided that the agreement was to take effect from 1st January, 1961 and was to remain in force for five years from that date. In view of the expiry of the above agreement, the appellant and the same Union entered into a fresh agreement on December 6, 1966 regarding the terms of engagement and conditions of employment for staff employees. This agreement also deals with various matters. Cl.6 dealing with retirement, provided that the staff employees shall retire at the end of the month in which they attain the age of fifty-eight years. Clause 32 provided that the agreement was to have effect from 1st January, 1966, and was to remain in force for five years from that date.
5. On August 2, 1966 the Company informed the concerned workman that as per the Company s Regulations, he was due to retire on February 28, 1967 as he will be attaining the age of 58 years on February 15, 1967. The workman replied on September 7, 1966 stating that he was not bound to retire on completion of 58 years as he had entered the service of the Company long before the Standing Order fixing the age of retirement at the age of 55 years were framed. According to the workman, he was entitled to continue in service till he completed 60 years of age. In the reply he had also referred to the m
relied on : Agra Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. v. Sri Alladin
referred : Guest, Keen, williams, Private Ltd. v. P. J. Sterling
Salem Erode Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. v. Employees Union
referred to : Dunlop Rubber Co. (India) Ltd. v. Workman
relied on : Guest, Keen, Williams, Private Ltd. v. P. j. Sterling
Agra Electricity Supply Co. Ltd, v. Sri Alladin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.