Advocates:
G.B.PAI, K.P.AGRAWAL, LALITA KOHLI, MADAN MOHAN DAS, MANJU GUPTA, MANOJ SVARUP, O.P.RANA, R.K.GARG, V.J.Francis

Based on the legal document provided, here are the key points regarding the case U. P. State Electricity Board vs. Hari Shanker Jain:

• Case Subject: The case concerns the age of retirement for workmen employed by the U. P. State Electricity Board and raises general questions regarding workmen employed by statutory bodies and corporations. (!)
• Background: Two workmen were originally employed by Messrs. Seth Ram Gopal and Partners, where certified Standing Orders did not prescribe an age of superannuation. When the U. P. State Electricity Board purchased the undertaking in 1964, it did not make new Standing Orders as required by the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. (!)
• The Regulation: On May 28, 1970, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh notified a regulation made by the Board under Section 79(c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, setting the compulsory retirement age at 58 years (or 60 for inferior servants). (!) (!) (!)
• Legal Challenge: The workmen challenged the regulation in the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the Board was not competent to make such a regulation because the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, was a special Act that should prevail. (!)
• High Court Decision: The Full Bench of the High Court held that the Standing Orders Act applies to the Board but that regulations framed under Section 79(c) of the Electricity Act do not cease to be operative. It further held that Section 13-B of the Standing Orders Act applies only to government establishments. Consequently, the Division Bench quashed the notification. (!) (!) (!)
• Constitutional Context: The Supreme Court noted that while Directive Principles of State Policy (like Articles 42 and 43) are not enforceable by courts, they are fundamental in governance and guide the interpretation of statutes concerning worker welfare. (!)
• Special vs. General Law: The Court determined that the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act is a "Special Act" dealing specifically with conditions of service, whereas the Electricity (Supply) Act is a "General Act" regarding electricity development. Under the principle Generalia specialibus non derogant, the special law prevails over the general law. (!) (!) (!)
• Interpretation of Section 13-B: The Court interpreted Section 13-B of the Standing Orders Act to mean that a rule or regulation notified by the Government excludes the Act's applicability only to the extent that the rule covers the field. The notification of a single regulation is sufficient to exclude the Act regarding that specific matter. (!) (!)
• Final Holding: The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act is a special law, and regulations made by the Board regarding matters covered by it (like age of superannuation) are effective only if notified by the Government under Section 13-B or certified under Section 5. Since the Board's regulation on retirement age was duly notified, it is valid, and the workmen were properly retired. (!)